Episode Summary:

India’s technology landscape is evolving at breakneck speed—but are companies truly prepared for the legal and regulatory shifts that come with it?

In this episode of Chai & Chips, I speak with Karishma Sundara, Founder of Kintsugi Law and a leading advisor in technology, media, and telecommunications (TMT). Karishma brings deep clarity to some of the most complex issues facing startups and enterprises today—data protection, AI labelling, consent management, and regulatory compliance in India.

We unpack India’s rapidly changing regulatory environment, including the Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDPA) and proposed AI labelling guidelines, and explore how these laws compare with global approaches in the EU and China. Karishma explains why compliance should be viewed not as a cost, but as a long-term investment—and why misunderstanding Indian regulations can quietly become one of the biggest risks for technology companies.

This conversation is essential listening for founders, operators, and leaders navigating AI, data, and digital businesses in India.

YouTube episode link:

Prefer listening on the go? Find us on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Key Insights & Takeaways:

1. Compliance Is Not a Cost—It’s a Long-Term Asset

One of the biggest mistakes startups make is treating compliance as an unavoidable expense. Karishma argues that strong compliance frameworks become a source of long-term value, especially during fundraising, acquisitions, or regulatory scrutiny. Weak compliance often surfaces at the worst possible time—when the stakes are highest.

2. India’s Laws Are Inspired Globally—but Fundamentally Distinct

A common misconception is that compliance with GDPR or other global regimes automatically ensures compliance in India. In reality, Indian regulations—especially under the DPDPA—have unique nuances, including a closed list of non-consent-based “legitimate uses.” Assuming equivalence can lead to serious blind spots.

3. Data Protection in India Is Deeply Consent-Driven

India’s data protection framework places consent at the centre, but not in a simplistic way. Valid consent must meet strict conditions, making awareness and education critical. Without widespread understanding, there’s a real risk of either invalid consent or user fatigue that could slow technology adoption.

4. Awareness Building Is as Important as Enforcement

For the DPDPA to succeed, awareness must precede enforcement. Karishma emphasizes that data principals (users) must understand how consent works and what their rights are. India’s diversity makes this challenging—but examples like UPI adoption show that large-scale behavioural change is possible with the right communication.

5. AI Labelling Will Change How We Perceive Digital Content

Proposed AI labelling rules could significantly alter how people consume online content. Explicit and permanent labels for AI-generated or AI-modified media may reshape trust, credibility, and platform responsibility. Even seeing “AI-generated” in print can change user perception dramatically.

6. Platforms, Not Just Creators, Will Bear Responsibility

Under the proposed AI rules, responsibility doesn’t stop with the creator. Platforms will be expected to detect AI-generated content—even independently of user declarations—creating a layered system of accountability between creators, tools, and platforms.

7. Sensitive Sectors Must Go Beyond Minimum Compliance

While the DPDPA does not create separate categories for sensitive data like health information, organizations in health-tech and ed-tech cannot rely on minimum standards alone. “Reasonable security safeguards” must be context-specific, especially when dealing with children’s data or medical records.

8. Indian Regulation Is Trying to Balance Innovation and Control

Rather than introducing a standalone AI law, India appears to be regulating AI through intersecting frameworks—content laws, data protection, and platform governance. This approach signals an attempt to balance innovation with oversight, though its long-term impact will only become clear with enforcement history.

9. New Regulations Will Create New Startup Opportunities

Regulatory change doesn’t just create constraints—it creates new markets. Consent managers, compliance tooling, and legal-tech platforms could emerge as meaningful startup opportunities, provided they meet clearly defined regulatory thresholds.

10. The Biggest Risk Is Thinking You’re Already Compliant

Perhaps the most important takeaway: assuming compliance is often more dangerous than knowing you’re not compliant. Indian regulations demand deliberate interpretation, customization, and ongoing reassessment—not checkbox compliance.

Connect with our Guest:

• Karishma Sundara on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/karishma-sundara/

Follow Chai & Chips:

• Subscribe on YouTube(Chai & Chips - YouTube), Spotify(Chai & Chips Podcast | Podcast on Spotify), Apple Podcasts(Chai & Chips Podcast - Podcast - Apple Podcasts) or your favourite podcast platform to never miss an episode.

• Leave a review—it helps us reach more listeners!

• Follow Prakash on LinkedIn(Prakash Mallya | LinkedIn) and X(Prakash Mallya (@PrakashMallya) / X) for updates.

· Episode transcripts on Substack: https://www.prakashmallya.com/s/chai-and-chips-podcast

• Episode transcripts on Medium: https://medium.com/@pmallya2411

Episode Transcript

Speakers:

• Prakash Mallya (Host)

• Karishma Sundara (Guest)

Preview: 00:00:00 - 00:01:19

Prakash Mallya 01:20

Hi Everyone! Welcome to Chai & Chips. Today we have with us, Karishma Sundara. Karishma is a seasoned legal advisor. She is the founder of Kintsugi law, a wonderful name. We will talk all about it. And prior to that, she has been involved in a variety of leading legal firms in India, and she has studied in Cambridge with BA Honours and MA Honours from University of Edinburgh. She is a renowned legal advisor in the area of data privacy, data protection, e commerce, AI related issues and several other elements of legalese, as we say, in the area of technology, media and telecommunications and here on, we will term it as TMT. So, welcome to the show, Karishma.

Karishma Sundara 02:17

Thanks for having me, Prakash.

Prakash Mallya 02:18

Yeah, it is going to be a very interesting conversation on law and regulation. So, let me start with Kintsugi law. What made you choose Kintsugi as a name? It’s a beautiful name.

Karishma Sundara 02:32

It is a beautiful name. So let me start at the beginning. Kintsugi, I think, represents so many things to so many people. It’s a very layered concept, and often people end up focusing on repair. For me, I think that sustainability is the overarching theme. Kintsugi is, of course, a Japanese art form, and the way it works is that broken pieces of pottery or if they’re glass etc. are not discarded. Instead, they’re sort of collected and joined together again with gold. And when I heard this concept, and I saw Kintsugi firsthand, it really spoke to me, and when I was starting something new, and to me, Kintsugi is something new. It creates something new out of something old. And that is the reason why I named the practice this.

Prakash Mallya 03:23

Very cool! So, let me start with just the overall landscape. And if you look at law in general, in the TMT space, it has had very fast evolution. So, you have had online gaming law very recently, you had far more recently, data protection law, an updated one and AI labelling guidelines happened a few weeks back. So how do you look at the landscape today? Or how should one look at the landscape today, and what could be the compliance looking ahead for companies, including startups, and what risks or opportunities do you see for companies given the environment?

Karishma Sundara 04:09

Sure, on that one, you’re right. I think the law has been changing at an absolutely galloping pace. In the past few months itself, we’ve seen an online gaming law which completely reworked the gaming industry. It prohibited real money gaming, and it drew specific attention to what social games really are. We’re looking at the potential for those games to be further regulated. But of course, that’s still in the wings now, and I think the biggest development, of course, is data protection. We are looking at a brand-new law. I say brand new, but of course, it’s two years old. The reason it’s new is because we finally have the implementing rules. Everyone’s been waiting for this law for at least since the first iteration, which came in in 2018 and now it’s time to finally implement. The landscape is changing, and I think that one of the things, one of the ways to really approach it, is with eyes wide open. You have to know what’s happening. You have to understand the different regulations impacting your business. Often, I’ve noticed with both, I think, startups and established companies, there is a tendency to believe that Indian laws are derived entirely from laws of different jurisdictions. Now, while this may be true to an extent, it ignores the nuances that come with Indian law. And the problem there is that you stop yourself from building effective compliance if you assume you’re already compliant. And I think that that’s an important thing to keep in mind is to keep your eyes wide open and to fully assimilate the requirements of these laws, to understand whether you’re within scope, to understand whether you need to do something to change how you currently operate, and what could be the risks If you don’t.

Prakash Mallya 06:00

And if what you just said makes a lot of sense, but you’re also operating in an environment where things are changing very quickly. So, does it mean that in the current environment, you need skilled expertise, or different kind of expertise, to make sure you know where the puck is going?

Karishma Sundara 06:20

I think that’s where doing experts come in. And I think that that’s really where inputs come today. Honestly, it’s about strategic inputs on difficult situations, because at the end of the day, a lot of entities have either midsized teams to handle this internally, or they have larger external teams to do this. But what ultimately is going to move the needle is whether you’ve strategically changed things, whether it’s at a macro level, deciding what compliance plan to follow, or whether it’s about dealing with those nuanced issues, issues which you wouldn’t traditionally encounter otherwise, and that will keep you ahead of the curve.

Prakash Mallya 07:05

Yeah, agree, and you are a trusted advisor both to startups and Fortune 500 companies in all the areas that we talked about. So, you would be tracking what’s happening globally as well, because these rules and regulations are being thought through in different parts of the world. So, let’s consider AI labelling guidelines and data protection guidelines per se. How do you compare and contrast different countries on how they are looking at it, and where does India stand today.

Karishma Sundara 07:34

Sure. I think being aware of what’s happening globally is deeply important, particularly where you may not have regulatory guidance immediately within the country. So, for example, if you look at the AI labelling measures, India’s not the first to think about this. Other jurisdictions have, China, for example, did very recently introduce its labelling measures requirement. You have other jurisdictions, like the EU, which has a very specific AI legislation, which also considers labelling. But of course, they all do this a little differently, and I think that’s what’s interesting here. For example, you have China which talks about explicit labels for specific kinds of synthetic content and typically high-risk kinds. So, for example, if you have facial manipulation or if you have facial generation, those are the kinds of content and synthetically generated content that will require an explicit label, whereas you could potentially have an implicit label for other kinds. If you look at the EU on the other hand, which talks of machine-readable labels. And these are very different and could be different from human readable labels. You could be looking at a watermark, for example. You could be looking at embedded metadata. You could be looking at different things that may not be visible to the average viewer. But English law is different, so we’re looking at something that sits somewhere in the middle there. And I think that’s why it’s important to understand the nuances here locally. We’re looking, for example, at a label that could apply to all synthetically generated content, anything that is generated or modified using AI. And that’s a tremendous amount of content online today, so I think it’s going to drastically change not just how systems that enable this generation function, but also just how we perceive online content, anything with an explicit label today, which tells you AI generated, even if we’re somewhat aware that it may be, seeing it in print, whatever form it may take, is likely going to change how we view it.

Prakash Mallya 09:43

Yeah. So, one aspect I want to ask you is labelling all data versus labelling only the synthetic data. The article I was reading was companies having a view that if you label everything, then it’ll add to their cost. What’s your perspective on it?

Karishma Sundara 10:01

Well, first, I wanted to clarify that the labelling requirement doesn’t apply to everything, just anything that is synthetically modified or generated using an AI tool. While we’re surrounded by AI generated content today, it could create this perception that you’re going to end up labelling everything, and it may end up being true across large portions of the internet, but for now, businesses themselves don’t need to worry about having to label everything.

Prakash Mallya 10:31

Okay, so suppose I’m a podcaster. It’s not supposed, I am a podcaster. So how does my life change?

Karishma Sundara 10:40

Well, your life isn’t changing immediately, because these are draft amendments to these rules. And second, the amendment doesn’t impose an obligation on you. You’re as long as you’re not the one who is, say, providing an AI tool that enables modification. It’s not going to apply to you. On the other hand, if you are simply a podcaster, as you are here, and you use an AI tool to modify say this interview, and then you publish it on say a social media platform, if these rules are amended as proposed, this could change things in two ways, One at the time of you creating this modified content, it could receive a label which is generated at source. And this label is supposed to be permanent, it’s supposed to be indelible, and it’s supposed to meet certain size specifications, like covering 10% of the visual area for audio content. And it’s, of course, something we need to consider in terms of mixed media content. It’s supposed to cover at least 10% of that initial audio recording to indicate to the person who is receiving this content that it is somehow AI generated or AI modified. And the other stage at which this will change things is when you post this content. So, one you’ll be asked to declare whether or not you used an AI tool to modify or generate it, and then, regardless of your declaration, the platform is expected to review this content before it’s published, to determine whether or not an AI tool was used. So, it’s likely that the labelling and disclaimer requirements will work in tandem, because if you have an indelible label that’s applied, it perhaps will make it easier for platforms to detect if AI technology has been used and then be able to enable a disclaimer with that content.

Prakash Mallya 12:38

That’s a good explanation. So, you started or founded Kintsugi law and as a specialized legal practice in TMT space. And if you consider everything that is going on and the regulations that have already come into play, how would you consider India’s position in technology innovation and the legal and the regulatory environment. Does it inspire or spur innovation? What’s your point of view on it?

Karishma Sundara 13:10

So, I think the impact on tech innovation is something which we’ll have to wait to see. So much has changed recently, and we still don’t have enforcement history or regulatory guidance to understand what that’s going to look like, say, five years from now or 10 years from now. So, I think it’s very much a wait and watch. But I do believe that the regulation themselves are indicating an interest in balancing innovation with regulation. For example, if you look at the AI governance guidelines, which the government published quite recently, AI is, of course, a massively like dynamic space, and it is increasingly being regulated in a lot of other places in the world. But India has taken this stance, at least for now that it seems unlikely that it will want to regulate it through a separate legislation. Now this is important, because the path that they’re choosing instead is to approach it from different intersecting laws, wherever there could be an overlap, wherever there could be a need to clarify an issue in terms of how AI may change things, whether it’s potentially, like we’re looking at online content laws, right? For example, the AI labelling requirements we’re discussing, that’s one of those potential ways in which this could change.

Prakash Mallya 14:31

Right. So, if one looks at the data protection law, DPDPA, which got kind of announced very recently as well, what do you believe the framework or principles that the government should adopt as it rolls out data protection law in India?

Karishma Sundara 14:54

So, I think before we get to the principles, I think one of the very important things which will I think enable the success of this legislation is just awareness building. I think, for the system to work properly, all of its stakeholders need to buy into it. For example, you are leading with a deeply consent focused regime, and consent has to flow from the person whose data it is, and because that’s the case, they need to understand what consent means. So, I think before we get to the principles in terms of enforcement or regulatory guidance, I think this is going to be the number one step, ensuring that people understand that their lives are going to change considerably and how. And of course, we’ve had, we now have 18 months to decide what that implementation cycle will look like. But I think having this initial awareness building alongside compliance building is going to be very, very important.

Prakash Mallya 15:53

And how could that awareness building take place in such a large and diverse country like India?

Karishma Sundara 16:01

Honestly, I think it just it has to be modelled to suit different audiences. It has to come from perhaps even an overlap or an intersection between businesses and say, regulators to be able to understand how you reach people, to tell them how this can function. Now, of course, we have a great example in terms of UPI, which is now used across the nation and freely and easily. And of course there are, of course, drawbacks and bad actors wherever you have technology adoption and wherever you have technology development. But with this law, it’s I think, a lot more intricate than simply ruling out even a technology as dynamic as UPI. But we got everyone to buy into that. So, the question really is, can we explain the intricacies of this law to everyone.

Prakash Mallya 16:57

In a simple way.

Karishma Sundara 16:59

In a simple way. So, the law itself, in fact, requires so much of this to be made understandable and easily understandable. But I think one of the issues with that is that waits for implementation, which means it may not happen for 18 months, but that kind of change can’t happen overnight for a very important segment of those stakeholders, which is your data principles. So, I think that awareness building needs to start much earlier.

Prakash Mallya 17:28

So, couple of segments I feel are going to be more impacted or more critical in areas of data protection or AI, one of them is healthcare. The other is education, simply because kids are involved in education, and healthcare has so much private data across the board. So how do you see the impact of these regulations on sectors like health-tech or ed-tech, how companies operate?

Karishma Sundara 17:57

So, I think it’s going to be an interesting space to look at, because obviously, you’re dealing with data that’s more sensitive in some cases where they’re looking at health information, and in other cases with education, especially insofar as you’re handling children’s data. The law, of course, very specifically protects children’s data, but with sensitive data like health information, the DPDPA itself is not providing specific protection for this kind of data. But like I said earlier, I don’t think that means that you can immediately relegate all the information that you handle to the same level of scrutiny, to the same level of protection, because the law over and above everything else, requires you to apply reasonable security safeguards. There is an at minimum list, which is also provided by the government, but because you have to apply reasonable safeguards, you have to determine what’s appropriate in a circumstance.

Prakash Mallya 18:56

And what is the at minimum list.

Karishma Sundara 18:59

So, the at minimum list is a list that’s come through with the recently notified data protection rules. So far under the main statute under the DPDPA, businesses have been told that they can adopt reasonable security safeguards. Now the word reasonable enough itself, of course, allows for a degree of latitude when you’re interpreting what’s appropriate for your business. So, what came through with the rules, of course, is an at minimum list, which does include specific requirements like log retention for say, period of a year to be able to enable the investigation of unauthorized access. There is limited clarity around what those logs need to be, but there is, of course, a positive retention requirement for that period of a year. The rest of the at minimum requirements, I think, by and large, import the same flexibility that the word reasonable allows under the DPDPA, which, again, is helpful to the extent that you’re able to assess what’s appropriate for the kinds of data that you handle.

Prakash Mallya 20:07

Understand. So, you can customize, to a certain extent, based on what kind of data, what kind of consumer segments your cater to.

Karishma Sundara 20:17

Absolutely. And I think that data protection will always be a question of understanding what data you handle, what could be the implications if there is a data breach, and all of those questions and those responses will help you build a system that works for you.

Prakash Mallya 20:37

You. You span both startups and Fortune 500 companies, right? And in that regard, what in your experience, you think is the biggest misconception people have about India’s regulatory and legal environment?

Karishma Sundara 20:54

I think I touched on this a little while ago when we talked about how people perceive India’s laws as being a derivation of other laws in different jurisdictions. So, I think biggest misconception is very often related to believing that India’s laws are derived entirely from laws in other jurisdictions. What this ends up doing is people believe that if they’re compliant with law A in Country B, that they are automatically compliant with the law in India, or that there will be very little modification or customization that would be necessary. And this, by and large, isn’t true. While Indian laws, and particularly say we take our data protection law, has drawn inspiration from different regimes, it is distinct from them. And one very good example of this is how you process personal data, or rather the lawful basis you rely on. So, to just take a few steps back, processing includes collecting information or storing it, for example, or analysing it or using it. It’s a very broad definition, and this means that you can’t do any of those things without having a lawful basis. So traditionally, our data protection regime has focused on consent and how consent drives this kind of processing. That’s true, I think, even under the DPDPA, but with one difference. There’s a closed list of non-consent based legitimate uses which you can rely on to be able to process personal data without consent. But these legitimate uses not themselves are specific to particular scenarios. They apply, for example, in a medical emergency, or they apply where someone may voluntarily provide their personal data for a particular purpose, so in those circumstances, because it would either be infeasible or impractical or unnecessary to obtain consent, you can rely on alternative. But very often, because there is a parallel, different basis under, say, the GDPR, which is legitimate interests, there is a belief that two could be seen as corresponding provisions. While there could be some overlap in some cases, depending on the specific facts at hand, there isn’t an automatic and complete overlap between the two.

Karishma Sundara 20:54

Okay. So, in that regard, if you’re advising a startup founder in India operating in such an environment, what would your advice be for them?

Karishma Sundara 22:47

So, I think with startups, it’s a very specific kind of risk profile. You’re looking very likely at new businesses that perhaps will be unlike their larger say, competitors, or larger businesses unburdened by legacy data that they now have to pass through. So, one good thing, I think, with a lot of startups is you get to start either with minimal baggage, or you get to start afresh. The good thing with I think, starting afresh is that you have a clean slate, you get to build a compliant framework from the ground up. And I think one piece of advice that I would offer is to, and I know it’s hard to do, especially when you’re a startup, is to not view compliance purely as a cost, but to rather see it as an investment in long term value. It becomes a stumbling block at the time of round of investment, for example, in the future, where investors want to know if you’re compliant with laws, especially laws with high risks, especially laws with huge penalties involved if you are non-compliant. So, I think looking at that, and of course, there is a potential for startups to have an exemption from certain provisions under, say, the data protection law, but we’re still waiting for notification to that effect.

Prakash Mallya 25:11

Yeah, so a related or slightly different question. Do you have any example of a recent regulation which was intended to protect consumers and businesses, but had an unintended consequence of impacting technology adoption or innovation?

Karishma Sundara 25:30

Well, to look into the crystal ball, I would think there’s at least one that comes to mind. I don’t know ultimately and this is missing. I don’t know how this will ultimately play out, but think DPDPA and specific, some specific provisions of it, for example, consent. The new law is very heavily consent driven, but this is consent that’s a deeply intricate form of consent. It has specific conditions that need to be fulfilled for the consent to be valid. And I think one of the problems with that is being able to communicate what consent means to an audience as diverse and as populous as India’s. To be able to explain it in simple terms. And I think this goes back to something we discussed earlier, awareness creation. I think that could be one of those stumbling blocks. Either you create an audience that is interacting with these notice consent flows and just doesn’t know what’s happening, and therefore providing consent that could be technically invalid, or you have an entire group of people who just do not, who cease to want to utilize technology that requires them to read voluminous notices and provide consent at every stage. And again, like I said, it’s hard to know how that’s going to play out. And of course, the law does have an inbuilt mechanism which is expected to streamline it, which is consent management, creating a new class of individuals called consent managers, who are to provide sort of an interoperable platform through which a data principle can again give, receive or manage their consent. But of course, leaving aside the issue of awareness we just spoke of, even if we were to assume that somebody was aware of this and aware of how consent functions, for this to work as a system, all stakeholders need to buy in. You need to have platforms who want to integrate with consent managers. You need to have users and data principles who want to be able to use a consent management platform because it’s only use, and I think extensive use, that’s going to show us what successfully running a platform like that will look like.

Prakash Mallya 27:51

Yeah. And do you also foresee startup opportunities in new categories generated as a result of some of these recent regulations?

Karishma Sundara 28:02

Startup opportunities, I think there could be some. I think it really depends on whether or not they meet regulatory criteria. So, for example, consent managers, consent managers must meet certain specific criteria under the law. So, I think once, if they meet those requirements, I don’t see why not.

Prakash Mallya 28:27

That’s a good segue into our rapid fire round where I’ll ask you a bunch of questions related to law, or sometimes not related to law. Should we do it?

Karishma Sundara 28:41

Sure, let’s do it.

Prakash Mallya 28:42

Okay. Describe your consulting style in three words, but one must be a food item.

Karishma Sundara 28:50

Oh gosh, this is gonna be a hard one. Okay, I’ll say clear, concise. And for my food item, I’m going to pick a slightly complicated one, a vegan chocolate cake.

Prakash Mallya 29:05

Why a vegan chocolate cake?

Karishma Sundara 29:07

So, I recently tried a recipe which has now made it a favourite. And two, because I think that it’s sustainable, and ultimately, it’s a classic with a twist, which I think is how I’d hope that people who know me can describe me and describe the practice of law that I offer.

Prakash Mallya 29:28

Very interesting. So, next question, a book or movie that most shaped your thinking on technology or justice?

Karishma Sundara 29:36

I think it’ll be very hard to pick one book or movie that shaped my understanding of technology or justice. So, I’ll settle for something else. I’d like to talk about, a recent movie that changed how I think about or focused on one particular issue, which is, I think grievance redressal. The movie I’m talking about, of course, is one called Swiped. It is a movie about the rise of a particular dating application, and what struck me the most is how this app was modelled on addressing a common consumer complaint, which is stopping unsolicited contact. And of course, I’m sure there are multiple other grievances, and maybe doesn’t solve it entirely, but the idea of creating something and baking grievance addressal into its design, I think there are lessons in there for everyone. The reason I say this, of course, is that today we’re dealing with we’re surrounded by technology. We live out our lives online, whether it’s shopping online or buying your groceries. Ultimately, being able to have effective grievance redressal isn’t just a question of ensuring your users are happy. It’s about making sure that you ultimately save time and effort and build a holistic brand, and, of course, comply with the law. A number of laws require grievance addressal, and I think there is a blind spot here that we’re missing. For example, being able to utilize data that comes through from grievances, to be able to say, either automate responses in an intelligent way to be able to say, use data to determine who’s a bad actor, to determine where you may have an operations issue. I think these are blind spots today, which could see a meld between business and law, if appropriately deployed.

Prakash Mallya 31:36

If you weren’t in law, what would you be doing?

Karishma Sundara 31:40

Oh, I’d be teaching English, without a doubt.

Prakash Mallya 31:42

Teaching English. Oh, you have a background there as well.

Karishma Sundara 31:46

I do, I do. So, I enjoyed English literature as a college student. I loved it. I spent four years studying it.

Prakash Mallya 31:54

Okay, what part did you enjoy in that?

Karishma Sundara 31:58

So, I loved being able to see literature stand on its both on its own and in a particular historic or cultural context. And what really brought this home to me was I’d be studying a particular period of literature, let’s say medieval literature, and I also took a course in history of art. So, I would then leave to go to a different lecture, and suddenly I’d be looking at some art from the same period of time and thinking, Okay, here’s where the influences lie. And I think that enables you to see the world in a much bigger way, a much broader way. And I think that’s fundamentally important, because it ensures you don’t live a blinkered life.

Prakash Mallya 32:43

Very well said. So, from there, history of art, let’s get back to cyber security. One thing I wanted to ask you was, as per PwC 2022 data India is ranked number two in cyber-attacks globally, right? And the current regulation, it used to be addressed on the basis of cybersecurity framework, but with DPDPA regulation coming on very recently, it could be a different data protection regime. So how do you foresee this being addressed, such issues being addressed in the future? Do you estimate a change happening?

Karishma Sundara 33:26

That’s a great question, and I think it’s one a lot of people are asking. Today, you’re right in saying that the cyber security regime is handled by a separate regulator. Its thresholds for notification are different, and yes, we’re going to see a change with the DPDPA, but the change is going to be one which involves both inward looking and outward looking, because we’re looking at now a regime that’s going to govern personal data breaches. Now not all data breaches need be personal data breaches, but every personal data breach will likely be a data breach. So, it’s about being able to understand that these two regimes are going to run in parallel, with different timelines for reporting, different reporting thresholds, different levels of information to be provided. It’s going to require a lot of streamlining here. And the second thing, of course, is that the second requirement under the DPDPA is an outward notification to affected persons. So that means you’re going to have to craft very specific notices for users who are impacted again within very, very short timelines to provide this information. So, I think one of the challenges is going to be understanding where these systems converge, both internally and externally, to ensure that when it comes to an event, how do you identify it? How do you report it? To whom do you report it? How quickly and what do you tell them when you report it?

Prakash Mallya 35:00

Understand, yeah. India has 5.3 crore cases pending, if I’m not wrong. Does AI present any hope of reducing the cycle of resolution for citizens? That’s part one to that question. And part two is, you talked about ChatGPT and people believing it as gospel. What do you think is the impact of AI on jobs in the legal space?

Karishma Sundara 35:32

Okay, so to answer the first question, I think, yes, I think AI has tremendous value to add there. We do have a tremendous backlog of cases, often during due to not having, I think, just enough time to deal with them. And I think that’s where we can perhaps see it provide immense value. We’re already seeing certain courts like you have Kerala High Court who’s already looking at implementing it, utilizing AI data. And I think we just have to wait to see how those instances pan out for us to be able to see other adoption, other increased deployment of AI in these spaces. And I think that’s when we’ll really be able to tell what that delta is in the provision of legal services. One of course, we have legal tech is absolutely expanding at an unprecedented rate. We have law practices adopting AI in and through the day-to-day activities, and I think that’s bound to provide some change and definitely value add. But I think what we’re not thinking through well enough is how to blend that with, say, incoming cohorts of young associates who join practices. And I think that’s a twofold issue. One, I think it’s about being able to show them what AI looks like in that workspace when they’re in college, when as part of their legal education, to show them how to use it. Now, these are young people who, and if I may say so, young people who are using AI every day, very likely, but to show them its specific use in how they might use it for work is, I think, going to be very important. I don’t just mean this from the perspective of understanding its research capabilities or understanding its drafting capabilities. I think it’s equally important to provide them guidance, and I think that can happen either at an internship stage or at the stage when you have a young associate come in, because ultimately, a lot of practices are using AI to cut out the initial effort spent in terms of voluminous research, in terms of summarization, in terms of doing a number of tasks that were traditionally utilized to build skill sets in young lawyers. So, what you have instead now are very young lawyers who have not already learned these skill sets but are having to now review documents without knowing how to review them. Part of knowing how to review something is knowing how to draft some things. And I think that so much of this is going to be understanding where that line is, to be able to imbue them with the skills to draft, the skills to review, and to then show them how they can use that in an efficient way, using AI.

Prakash Mallya 38:42

Sorry to interrupt your thought. But in such a situation, what would your advice be for youngsters looking at a career at the intersection of law, technology and policy?

Karishma Sundara 38:58

So, the advice I would give them would be to use these tools but use them judiciously. And the reason I say this is because there is a very real tendency to outsource things to AI tools, and you should be able to use them smartly and efficiently to outsource the right functions. The function you shouldn’t outsource is thinking, and I think that that’s something which a lot of young people may not already be accustomed to when it comes to using these tools in a scenario like legal advice. I think that’s where guidance comes in. That’s where you need to have internal governance, really, so to speak, being able to show them how to use these tools in a way that benefits everyone. Speeds up say, research enables them to do things faster, quicker, maybe even better. To be very honest, AI is deeply democratic people who didn’t have the ability to express themselves in a particular way now do it. But the downside is using it but not learning from it in some ways, right? So being able to draft something in a particular way is very, very handy, but if you continue to outsource but don’t realize or know how to do it yourself, that’s going to be a problem. For example, easy to rely on AI generated drafts. But how do you deal with an ongoing negotiation? How do you deal with in person meetings where you’re required to think you’re required to respond at that particular point of time based on your understanding of the law based on your understanding of the implications. A lot of this needs to happen organically, and I think that’s what they have to keep in mind as they enter the space.

Prakash Mallya 40:50

What’s your vision on Kintsugi law? Now that you are, like, three or four months into it, what do you believe is the impact you can create in the TMT space, or in general, the legal space in India?

Karishma Sundara 41:03

So, I think a little too early to say, but the hope is that it will be able to provide what clients are looking for, which is to hear from senior practitioners with experience who can provide clear, concise advice that draws on years of experience navigating difficult compliance structures.

Prakash Mallya 41:31

So, I have a final question that I ask all my guests, which is as follows, that India’s march into the areas like AI or semiconductors or deep tech, is much more than domestic growth. It’s about our place, or India’s place in the global map. And if you fast forward 10-15 years, where do you believe India’s position is or going to be at that point in time, and what needs to happen today from your vantage point to make that a reality?

Karishma Sundara 42:02

Interesting question. We’re looking today at an India which has 1.6 billion people, expected to stay the most populous country in the world all the way up until 2070. That is, we still have a window between now and then, and I think that’s a window we’re going to need to utilize to be able to ensure that we grow at the pace that we want to as a nation, grow at the pace that we want to for a population of this size. And I think one of the ways to do it is to not just use technology, and technology adoption has happened rapidly across the country at different stages, almost every person you see in an open space has a cell phone. Almost every person has a social media account. It is, it is rapidly, rapidly part of everyone’s life. But I think what we don’t have is a deep set understanding of how it functions, or what its impact can be. I think one of the gaps that we can address will be on the educational side. For example, you have the government talking about introducing AI based initiatives or building it into the curriculum, which I think is is a very interesting approach here, but I think it’s something we need to consider at every single stage. Where does it have its place in education, in formal education, where does it have its space in skill-based learning initiatives? And ultimately, where does it have its space across the cities that we live in, across the towns that we live in, to be able to implement it in ways that make a difference. For example, I remember seeing some a few data sets that someone had posted on social media a while ago about usage of Bangalore’s Metro, and it was interesting, because we’re talking about at a time when there were so many complaints. And I know there are often complaints about traffic and traffic jams. And it was interesting because he was plotting specific routes and looking at where there was an increased level of traffic and where there wasn’t. And wouldn’t it be wonderful if we were able to utilize data sets like this and combine it with other data sets to see where we have these jams, where we have issues to be able to create data-based solutions. Of course, database solutions that ultimately lead to infrastructure that enables easing this but ultimately pivots on data.

Prakash Mallya 44:42

Well, that’s a great thought. It’s a great place to close. Thank you, Karishma,

Karishma Sundara 44:46

Thank you for having me.

Prakash Mallya 44:48

Not at all. You’re welcome. And for our viewers, thank you for supporting Chai & Chips. Please subscribe to our channel. We are available on YouTube, Apple Podcasts and Spotify. If you like an episode, please share with your family and friends, because that’s the way to spread the word. And lastly, I would request, if you have feedback on the kind of guests you want to listen to, the kind of topics you want to learn more about, or any conversation in the past, what you felt, please send me an email. So, with that, thank you very much.

Episode Summary:

How does an economist view the intricacies of the semiconductor supply chain? What macro-level levers must India pull to transition from a service provider to a global technology powerhouse?

In this episode of Chai & Chips, I sat down with Dr. Badri Narayanan Gopalakrishnan, a seasoned economist, former Lead Adviser at NITI Aayog, and founder of Infinite Sum Modeling. With a career spanning advisory roles for the massive global entities like the ultimate semiconductor customer—tech giants—and governments, Badri provides a unique “30,000-foot view” of the industry.

We discuss the critical lessons India can learn from the rise of Taiwan, China, and Vietnam, the symbiotic relationship between AI and chip manufacturing, and the delicate dance of geopolitics in a fractured global supply chain. Badri also offers a candid look at the future of work in an AI-driven world and articulates a vision where India moves beyond “zero-sum” thinking to an “infinite sum” future of shared technological prosperity.

YouTube episode link:

Prefer listening on the go? Find us on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Key Insights & Takeaways

1. The “Snowball Effect”: India’s Semiconductor Tipping Point
Badri argues that India has passed a critical tipping point. For decades, despite having the talent, the country was “doing nothing” in terms of domestic production capability. However, recent years have seen a “snowball effect” where long-standing operations have aggregated into a massive surge, turning India into a multi-billion dollar exporter of electronics. The challenge now shifts from starting up to scaling up infrastructure and raw material security to sustain this momentum.

2. The Global Classroom: What India Must Adopt (and Adapt)
Badri breaks down specific lessons from global leaders:

• Taiwan: It’s not just about manufacturing; it’s about a relentless focus on specialized education and the government actively “championing” its companies (like TSMC) on the global stage.

• China: The lesson here is “crowding in” investment. Public investment spurred private capability, focusing heavily on supply chain depth rather than just final assembly.

• Vietnam: A masterclass in “Red Carpet” treatment—tax incentives and ease of doing business that welcomes foreign direct investment without friction.

3. The AI-Chip Symbiosis: It’s Not Just About Demand
While most discuss how AI drives demand for chips, Badri highlights the reverse: how AI is revolutionizing chip manufacturing. From defect detection to yield optimization, AI is compressing the R&D commercialization cycle. He warns, however, that India must develop unique “neuro-symbolic” and energy-efficient AI models suitable for its own constraints, rather than simply copying power-hungry Western Large Language Models (LLMs).

4. The “Infinite Sum” Approach to Geopolitics
In a world of trade wars and tariffs, Badri advocates for “Geo-economics” over pure geopolitics. He suggests India must maintain a “Give and Take” relationship, keeping tariffs pragmatic to protect domestic industry while remaining open enough to integrate with global supply chains. He terms this “Infinite Sum Modeling”—moving away from zero-sum competition to a state where mutual cooperation leads to infinite converging benefits for all partner nations.

5. From Service Provider to Technology Architect
The vision for 2047 is for India to transition from a consumer or back-office service provider to a “Global Technology Architect.” Just as India pioneered Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) like UPI for the masses, Badri believes India has the unique cultural and technical DNA to democratize access to high-tech solutions, creating inclusive technology leadership that benefits the Global South and beyond.

Connect with our Guest:

• Badri Narayanan on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/badrinarayanang/

• Badri Narayanan on X: https://x.com/badrinarayanang

Follow Chai & Chips:

• Subscribe on YouTube(Chai & Chips - YouTube), Spotify(Chai & Chips Podcast | Podcast on Spotify), Apple Podcasts(Chai & Chips Podcast - Podcast - Apple Podcasts) or your favourite podcast platform to never miss an episode.

• Leave a review—it helps us reach more listeners!

• Follow Prakash on LinkedIn(Prakash Mallya | LinkedIn) and X(Prakash Mallya (@PrakashMallya) / X) for updates.

Episode transcripts on Substack: https://www.prakashmallya.com/s/chai-and-chips-podcast

• Episode transcripts on Medium: https://medium.com/@pmallya2411

Episode Transcript

Speakers:

• Prakash Mallya (Host)

• Dr. Badri Narayanan Gopalakrishnan (Guest)

Preview: 00:00:00 - 00:01:23

Prakash Mallya 01:24

Hi Everyone! Welcome to Chai & Chips. Today we have with us Dr Badri Narayanan Gopalakrishnan. He’s an economist and founder of Infinite Sum Modeling. He is joining us from Seattle Washington today. He’s an associate faculty member at University of Seattle, Washington, Boston College and Oregon State University. He has written 15 books, 200 research papers, cited 6000 times across periodicals like Financial Times, CNN, BBC and New York Times, several other periodicals as well. He was part of NITI Aayog as a fellow leading the trade and commerce vertical, and now he’s a honorary nonresident fellow. He has advised several ministers around the world and organizations like Amazon, Google, Harvard University, TCS and Aditi Birla group. So welcome to the show, Badri, great to have you on Chai & Chips.

Badri Narayanan 02:25

Thank you, Prakash. Honor to be with you. Thank you.

Prakash Mallya 02:29

So I want to start with you have looked at it from different countries, different economies point of view in your consultations with ministries and economies around the world. So how do you see India’s position in semiconductors and electronics value chain? What could be the opportunities and what might be the pitfalls?

Badri Narayanan 02:49

Yeah, thank you again. Prakash, India’s current positioning in the global semiconductor industry is, I would say, relatively speaking, strong. But of course, it faces major international competition, so one of the focus areas for me in the last few years has been to develop policies for India, to develop capability in manufacturing in general, and electronics, in particular, so India can move to being considered as a hub in the electronics value chain. So the main contributors for India to be successful, you know, in the future, or a lot of long standing operations that have been happening, I would say, since 1980s and early 90s, and 2000s in places like Bangalore, where you are sitting now, in Gujarat, In Chennai, in Hyderabad, these days, there has been a lot of activity happening, and all these things have aggregated over time and kind of snowball and now led to where we are today. Furthermore, we should also not forget about the multinational and global partnerships that the Indian firms have been having with others. One recent example is Micron’s collaboration with Tata, Tata Group in Gujarat, and this can actually accelerate India’s capacity in the industry. And then these are all some positives. I distinctly remember in from 2019 to let’s go to 2021-22 and today, so the India’s electronic exports to the world have increased multiple times. It’s actually difficult to even. To quantify, you know, in terms of factors, because we were pretty much doing nothing in the late even in the late 2010s but suddenly we started exporting billions, so that that kind of tipping point happened in the last few years, all these developments that happened over time, and they kind of snowballed, and we got, got to such a pretty strong situation now, but yeah, you may, you may think that I’m being too positive and optimistic. Yes, India does face a lot of challenges. You know, one is lack of domestic production capability, particularly for the inputs used in semiconductors. I can look at some of the fossil fuels, the gas and so on, and all the you know, these inputs that are used in semiconductors are imported. And of course, if you are heavily reliant on imports, particularly from a few countries, not so much diversified this can, you know, weaken a lot of projects. Definitely, infrastructure is another major challenge. You know, we all know that we have come a long way in terms of infrastructure developments over the years, but, but that is when you compare our own time series data. If you look at over time, we are doing better before what you are earlier. But if you compare India with other competitors, infrastructure has been a major challenge. So, you know that the industrial zones are not, you know, very common across the country. You have some industrial zones where infrastructure is good, but it is not. They are not very common everywhere. So this is a major challenge. I remember having a discussion with the senior executive from Apple here in Bay Area. And he was actually talking about a similar kind of challenges, like particularly infrastructure. Given the given the sensitive, time sensitive nature of operations, the infrastructural constraint can be a problem. But as I mentioned, we are doing much better than before, and hopefully we will do even better in the future. But these are the heavy challenges we have, you know, in terms of being able to develop areas for semiconductors and electronics value chain.

Prakash Mallya 07:35

So that’s a great context Badri and I wanted to double click on the element you mentioned in terms of components and the value addition locally, and you would have seen the ecosystems evolve like China, Taiwan, even US, right? So are there any similarities or learnings we can draw on as we build the ecosystem here in India?

Badri Narayanan 08:04

Absolutely, Prakash, we have a lot of great lessons to learn from these other countries. You know, broadly speaking, the lessons are about investment into infrastructure development, policies of the government and effort taken by the government to diversify the operations, these are some aspects particularly India, should focus on leveraging strength in high technology industry hubs and also government programs that align national and state incentives. That’s an important point. In fact, one of the major functions of NITI Aayog been associated is mainly about coordinating between the different ministries in the central government or the union government, and aligning the incentives and priorities of national state governments. So these are, these are very important, like programs to promote semiconductors, wherein we consider the incentives across the states and national level, then one major thing that is missing is huge investments in research through universities. So that we all already know that India’s investments in research are very limited, you know, both from a public sector and a private sector point of view. But of course, we all also know, if you take ISRO as an example, we our efficiency of research expenditure is also very high. We can accomplish a lot with limited expenditure, but that cannot be generalized. That cannot be generalized, and that also cannot be used as a kind of an excuse to not invest in R&D. So those are some lessons. Let me. Go a little deep dive into the specific countries, maybe Taiwan, for example. In Taiwan, they have a well-established system for training and educating engineers and technicians involved in the semiconductor industry. Education has been given a lot of importance. I’ve been, you know, collaborating with a lot of colleagues in National Taiwan University, for example, and they are extremely good, and they are pretty high on world rankings and so on. So, the training and education component is very, very important, and particularly focusing on engineers and technicians. The second thing is, the government has established policy and programs aimed at developing the industry in a major way. So, they have things like five plus two innovative industries plan, and they have particularly focused on promoting high tech industries as well. In fact, I had an opportunity to meet one of the cabinet ministers from Taiwan. She had come to Seattle few years ago. She gave a speech, and in the speech, she spoke a lot about TSMC. You know, she was championing, pretty much. She was championing TSMC, and they were establishing some research ecosystem in the US, as you probably know, there has been some collaboration going on. And she was making so highly of TSMC and that kind of promotion, heavy promotion, not just in terms of promoting the industries to grow, but also championing those industries globally. This kind of initiatives have been done by Taiwan. And if you compare these two points I mentioned, over education, training and promotion, we are definitely lagging behind. Education of course, we have a lot of here in a lot of engineers graduating every year. We have probably the best in the world, even largest mass of people coming out every year with engineering degrees, even Masters and PhD also a lot of people are doing. But then the quality, and, even more importantly, the practical knowhow, the technical practical knowhow is lagging. So that is something we can learn from Taiwanese ecosystem. The second thing is the promotion that I talked about promotion, not only promoting industries locally, but also, whenever they go abroad, they don’t shy away from talking about major companies, and which, in India generally, if you do that, it’s, it’s being it’s kind of a taboo kind of thing, right? People don’t talk about specific industries because then, then there may be some suspicions, but I think we should go beyond that and definitely take some of our major winners, major companies global, to the global scale. Let me move to China for a little bit. China invested heavily in manufacturing equipment to strengthen its supply chain. So, I mean to your audience and to yourself, I don’t have to mention about how China has long away from its low-cost labor and advantage kind of perception. So that was actually the entry point some 20 years ago. They did that. But once they got in, they captured lot of markets. They started going up the value chain, and they invested heavily in manufacturing and supply chain strengthening. That is something that the investments, the public investments and the private sector investments that are what you call as crowding-in in economics, so that that has really played out well for them. And secondly, they really focused on localization. They have a lot of locally produced equipment, and even those equipment that are produced locally, they have very high localization rates. Definitely, rely on many other countries for some of the intermediate inputs and raw materials, but then they do make a lot out of them, and the value created is much more than what they’re importing. And this is exactly opposite of what we are facing in India. We’re importing a lot of materials. We still haven’t indigenized a lot, and the investments are also going on, but not to the scale of what China did in the past. Those are two lessons from China. Going to Vietnam, I want to talk a little bit about Vietnam because Vietnam, I always think of Vietnam as a country which we can look at without getting, you know, comments like, oh, they are far ahead of us, because Vietnam is quite similar a small economy, and then quite similar in terms of many of the per capita indicators. You know, they have lower cost of living, which attracts more professional talent and workers. This is actually something we also have. Vietnam and India are quite similar in terms of cost of living and per capita income and so on. So we don’t, you know, we have a similar advantage that Vietnam. The second major thing is, they do promote investments. They offer tax incentives to companies that set up operations in the country. They really give a red carpet welcome whenever people are going to invest in Vietnam. I heard a lot about that. I’ve not been to Vietnam myself, but I’ve heard a lot from other colleagues and friends that, you know, for example, the Japanese mission in Delhi, when they reached out to me, when I was at NITI Aayog, they said, you know, they kind of mentioned that whenever they have to, you know, they even mildly propose some investments in Vietnam, they are just being

Badri Narayanan 16:24

given such a warm welcome and given whatever is needed to come in. You just got to put in the money, invest and get in. They take care of the rest, whereas in India, even now, because despite a lot of initiatives by the honorable Prime Minister and commerce minister and finance minister and all other ministers and my colleagues in the bureaucracy, we still have a long way to go compared to these other countries, like the lack of coordination between the center and state governments, state and local governments, and the land acquisition. Lot of these things are really difficult, but that, again, is something that happens in democracies like India. But then, if you compare to the US, which you also mentioned as one of the countries, those things are pretty streamlined, despite you can say that, you know, Taiwan has a small country right now, is a small country and also a centralized economy. China has a centralized economy. India doesn’t have that luxury. But, yeah, you have US, which is again, very democratic. You have federal system and very large, you know, population MERS economy, but US has been able to do that so that, you know, those kind of comparisons we have to see, and in the US, it’s all because there is things have got quite streamlined, like, if you want to get into some investment projects, the government’s actually come and cooperate with you, same as what Vietnam does. And Vietnam also has invested heavily in research and education, very similar to what Taiwan has done. So anyway, Vietnam is actually following the footsteps of what Taiwan has done and even what China has done, and so on. And then US has done all this, you know, long time ago, like research, investments in the US are huge and tremendous, and that is why, even today, US is dominating. And these other countries, like Taiwan, China, Vietnam, they do, of course, lot of reverse engineering. And in the past, that’s what they did. But now, particularly China, has more into original research. A lot of Chinese universities have really been leading locally. So I think, these are some of the aspects, as I mentioned earlier, you know, investments into infrastructure development and government policies to incentivize and diversify operations. You know, education, research investments and aligning the incentives of various different parts of the government. So, I think these are the key things that we can learn from these countries that have done pretty well or increasingly doing pretty well in this area.

Prakash Mallya 19:14

Understand. So you talked about different contexts across different countries and what we can learn from them, Badri. One thing I wanted to ask you is about execution. There are several policies in motion, National Semiconductor Mission, PLI, DLI, different refinements of that have been implemented. Prime Minister recently announced RDI fund for research and development, which I thought was pretty big deal. So how do you look at the execution so far of the policies in motion, and what could we do to make it better?

Badri Narayanan 19:51

Yeah, thank you, Prakash. Yeah, definitely, all these policies are in the right direction in terms of you know, their intention, and they’re already making a dent on the ground. We can see a lot of expansion happening in the semiconductor conductor industry. But I would also like to point out some desirable things. You know, they already helped us accomplish a lot of things, but what more can be done? So, we have to improve the coordination between the national, state and the startups and the research efforts. And so, all the different policies that we discussed, you mentioned how to have some kind of coordination. Coordination is very important. And secondly, the R&D focus has to improve tremendously, increase tremendously and also, like the national education policy is one of the things that should come in this come into picture here. It has improved the applied, application orientedness of research, okay, that’s very important in this context. So, the research has to be more applied, and we are getting there and basically we also have to foster collaboration and cooperation with other countries, including the countries with whom we may see as not a very dependable partner. But we have to, you know, collaborate with them, like China, kind of countries. But then we shouldn’t just collaborate on one or two countries. We have to have a diverse set of partners. And we have to have a pretty complex and interconnected supply chain so that we don’t collapse if the country with whom we are collaborating more collapses. So we have to have a diversified approach and we also have to welcome investments from all countries and we had to strike a balance between protecting the domestic industry’s interest and improving competitiveness of the domestic industry through collaborations and foreign direct investments and so on. So, I hope that answers your question.

Prakash Mallya 22:13

Yeah, it does. It does. So, shifting gears a bit, right? I also wanted to bring in AI, because it’s very close to each other, right? So, one question I had was, how does semiconductor and AI, from a policy point of view, overlap, right? Does one fuel the other or the other way around? How do you see it as both are evolving simultaneously in the industry,

Badri Narayanan 22:43

AI can significantly accelerate chip manufacturing. It can increase the efficiency in production processing. It can also automate tasks such as defect detection. These improvements that can happen because of AI can lead to higher chip quality and a fast turnaround time between production and market. So, these are all important factors where AI is going to demand more chips manufacturing, but AI also can improve the processes and increase the efficiencies and also improve the qualities, quality of chips. So now AI focused processes, they are going to leverage semiconductor technology with integrated chips. And these chips are designed for specific AI functions such as NLP and recognition and so on. They are also optimized for speed. So, basically, if you take, for example, AI data centers, the kind of components that are needed, the kind of semiconductors that are needed, are going to be tremendously different and advanced compared to the existing ones. So basically, the growth of AI is going to increase the demand for semiconductors and also energy efficiency, because we are, we have, of course, achieved electricity for everyone, energy for everyone, but we still are not energy surplus country, so we still have some shortages. And if AI demands so much energy, we have to be prepared for that. So, which also means that we have to look for energy efficient semiconductors. So that is another important thing. Advancements in semiconductor design, such as system on chip architectures, these kind of, you know, new advancements can actually help shape AI to be more scalable. And in fact, just recently, we did some research on, you know, the AI data centers and the energy needs and the economic impact and so on. So, broadly speaking, you know, like, these are going to like that. AI is going to really increase the growth in semiconductors, but then the energy efficiency is a problem to be solved. So, one thing that is not much talked about, I’ll very briefly mention, is this evolution of neuro symbolic context-based AI. So, I’ve been working with some colleagues in the Bay area or doing some research on developing this kind of framework, and that attacks two issues. One is energy efficiency, and the second thing is also, you know, reducing the problems that we face in LLMs today in terms of hallucination and so on. So, they are very context based and focused. So, what I’m thinking is India should adopt those kind of cutting edge, you know, aspects of AI, not just what the, you know, the major big tech companies are doing, we also have to take, you know, take a unique path. And I think that can actually also, you know, promote the ambitions that we have. Promote the ability to achieve the ambitions that we have on semiconductors.

Prakash Mallya 26:24

So, I have a related question, and correct me if I’m thinking it wrong, right? Semiconductors have existed for a long period of time. India is 20% of the global chip designers, but we still don’t have world beating chip companies coming out of India just yet. AI is more recent. The research has evolved far more rapidly in the recent past, we have one of the largest footprints of software talent around the world, but we still don’t have world beating frontier models coming out of India just yet. So if you look at these two, there are parallels you can draw. And my question is, two or three related ones. One, what are the common causes you can cite in these two parallels? What could be the single most important policy lever to change the status quo, and how could you execute on them in the short, medium and long term?

Badri Narayanan 27:30

Yeah, I’ve done some research on this broad area of how the future of jobs, future of work, is going to play out, and what kind of policies the government should take. So I’ll just outline that in a couple of sentences first, and then come to the specifics, right? So, the future of work is typically going to be like greater demand for highly skilled labor and lower, I would say excess demand for highly skilled labor and excess supply of low skilled labor. So if you leave it as it is, if you leave it as status quo, the gap between the rich and poor is going to increase, and that’s going to have a lot of socio-economic implications, inequity and so on. Now, okay, that is a very general aspect. Now coming to a specific question.

Badri Narayanan 28:18

India’s job market has been the foundation of India software development

Badri Narayanan 28:26

employment, right? So now this has to be reshaped. So, this need not be eliminated. The automation coming from AI is going to offer newer roles, which the potential employees in India will need to relearn, along with the previous knowledge of software development and code. So, there is a lot of scope, or more than scope, requirement for the Indian workers, you know, experts, or whatever you talk about, depending on the level they have to, you know, learn, relearn, recalibrate what they’re doing. So, roles such as a model integration will be rising. Prompt engineering, those kind of roles are going to increase. Now, policy intervention can actually support startups to create software tools, investment in academic research and regulated policies that protect the income of employees whose jobs will be transitioning. So, some kind of, you know, I also thought about the something like the universal basic income kind of thing, where, when the job losses are happening en masse in the lower end of the spectrum, government can consider some social security options. So, it’s a combination of all these things. So, policy has to support increasing the supply of these ultra-high skilled workers and basically reduce the supply of or, yeah, two things, reduce the supply of the low skill workers and, and, to some extent, also increase their demand. So that way you can calibrate the supply demand equation. So definitely, you know, like all the different revolutions we have seen so far, different industrial revolutions we have seen so far, AI is going to disrupt the job market, but we have to be ready to take advantage of this, rather than get affected by this.

Prakash Mallya 30:33

Yeah, agree. And, and there are opportunities, there are challenges, as is always the case, yeah. And you think there are countries around the world who are looking at it actively and pursuing some interventions to minimize the job impact if that happens?

Badri Narayanan 30:56

Other countries are, you know, the most productive countries are the European countries. They have very, as you know, they have very stringent regulations, and they have pretty strong focus on Social Security and so on. So basically, they have, definitely, you know, done some of these initiatives, but then it’s just happening right now, right? So, the future preparedness is something that countries are, all you know, thinking about and working on. You know the EUA Act, which you might have seen, has a lot of aspects, both related to supply side of AI and the demand side of AI, in terms of, you know, privacy and so on, but also in terms of, you know, job related stuff. So, there are some lessons to learn from them. But I also have a strong feeling that we shouldn’t go too strong on regulating the innovators. So, we do definitely have to regulate them, but then the regulation has to be confined to situations where they are kind of exploiting and so on. Not like, we shouldn’t overregulate, basically. So, our model should be somewhere between the EU and the US. US is too, you know, liberal. So, of course the companies prosper, but then the people don’t have much say after over their privacy and so on. And even workers like you see a lot of layoffs happening as you speak here, where I live in Seattle, Bay Area and so on. So, we don’t want that kind of situation. We also don’t want the kind of situation the EU where there are no major large AI players because of the same reason. We have to be somewhere in the middle, is what I’m thinking. I don’t think we are in this aspect, you know, we are really in a bad position. We are already somewhere in the middle. Probably we should continue to stay there and be more proactive in the labor market interventions.

Prakash Mallya 33:10

Understand, fair point. It’s always going to be a balance versus over regulation. I agree with you. And in terms of balance, you have worked, been part of NITI Aayog and continuing to be, you have worked with other ministries, as well as looked at organizations around the world. What is an example of an evidence-based policy that got implemented and was wildly successful? Or it could also be another instance where it was not at all successful. Can you give us an example that the audience can relate to?

Badri Narayanan 33:46

It’s a great question. The evidence

Badri Narayanan 33:57

based policy is where I usually come in, and that’s, that’s the approach that I usually propose to many governments across the world. And the thing is, you know, like some of the statistical experts say, there are unknown knowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns, right? So we are mostly in policy. In our circles we are mostly trading the unknown unknowns. So we have to minimize the unknowns by, you know, looking at the data, doing some analysis, talking to people and so on. But definitely, there has to be a human element there. It’s not just numbers but also interacting the stakeholders and so on. So, in terms of examples, I can say, I can talk about some very general, high level examples, right, like I can just give some examples from India. Lot of reforms that happened in India, like, starting from the 1991 you know, opening up of the markets and the recent free trade agreements. In fact, I was very actively contributing to the negotiations of free trade agreements of India with many countries. So, these are all evidence based, because if you are negotiating these kind of agreements, you cannot just be a free trade advocate or protectionist. You have to be very pragmatic. You have to look at a particular commodity. There are some 8000 commodities you are negotiating about. In these 8000 commodities, you have to go deeper and see which of those commodities are being produced by the domestic industry and they’re going to be endangered because of opening up of the market by reducing the tariffs, which ones will not at all be affected, and who are we negotiating with? Let’s say, for example, we did an FTA with EFTA, European Free Trade Area countries. These countries are, like, high-cost economies, like, you know, Switzerland, Iceland, those kind of countries. So these countries are not going to compete with, let’s say, Indian textile industry, or Indian farmers and so on. So now that has to be taken into consideration. What are the commodities that are going to be endangered? What are the commodities that are going to benefit? So maybe there are certain products which it’s better to import from these countries rather than trying to produce domestically. So, we have to look at all these different permutations and combinations, using real data and also conducting stakeholder discussions, talking to the industries, and then come up with outcomes. And this really, the government of India did a great job in doing all these things in a short span of time, in within like, a couple of years, we signed like four trade agreements, starting with UAE, then Australia and EFTA and UK and EU is going on at very advanced stage. Of course, the US trade is going on. So all these trade policies happen very quickly, but then the groundwork has been happening over time, and lot of evidence-based policies are happening. Okay, this is a positive thing, and we are already seeing some positive signs from these, starting from the 91 reforms, and today. There can be pitfalls, and whatever research and analysis we do, evidence based policy making we do, whomever you know whatever kind of stakeholders we are going to engage, there are going to be blind spots, and there are also going to be things that we cannot anticipate right now about what is going to happen in the future. For this, I can come to US, if you take NAFTA, North American Free Trade Agreement. It happened in the early 90s. President Bill Clinton was pushing for it, and at that point, Mexico was almost a non-entity. Mexico was not producing much. So, all the policymakers and the economists, they all concluded that NAFTA is going to benefit the US tremendously, particularly in terms of industries, because US is going to export a lot to Mexico. Mexico was a closed economy. So, once you open up, Mexico is going to import a lot from the US. But what people forgot to capture was the possibility that Mexico can become a manufacturing powerhouse, which is what happened. So once that happened, then US started running trade deficit with Mexico, and rest is history, and that’s why President Trump came and renegotiated, and lot of things are happening. So, there can be these blind spots. We have to be cognizant of that in in our discussions here in chips and semiconductors, we have to be very cognizant of what we know today, what can potentially happen tomorrow. So if the people who did those policies then had taken into consideration one scenario where Mexico could have produced a lot, then all these confusions may not have happened. So in the same way, we have to look at multiple scenarios in the future so that can actually shield us from the pitfalls of evidence-based policymaking.

Prakash Mallya 39:27

So, it’s a lot of game theory, strategy and second and third order effects.

Badri Narayanan 39:34

Absolutely! These are all in action, a combination of these theories, numbers, human elements and so on. So we had to really take all these things into consideration in the negotiation.

Prakash Mallya 39:48

Yeah. So, on that note, let’s take a quick break to do a bunch of lightning round questions, Badri. I can ask you as an economist and as a person who is doing engagements around the world, a bunch of fun questions. You’re okay with that? My first question to you, if you add a magic wand to remove one regulatory hurdle for Indian innovators, what would it be?

Badri Narayanan 40:20

I think it would be the intellectual property rights. So, since it’s a short answer, I’ll keep it at that. So we have to give the innovators more control over the innovations that you’re producing. So they have to, they have to be able to preserve it and serve it for benefiting from it.

Prakash Mallya 40:45

Biggest misconception people have about economists?

Badri Narayanan 40:52

Yeah, that is the, you know, the fact that economists disagree with each other, I would say the disagreement happens in the details. But if you look at some of the things that matter for industries, particularly, if you take if you look at a government at a country level, there can be disagreements. But if you’re looking at a particular company or what are the strategies they can do, there are not a microeconomic strategies which can be very helpful and useful. So I would say microeconomics is not so much like not so much prone to disagreements. Macroeconomics can be. And also, I have tended to agree with economists from different schools of thought, depending on the situation. So, if economists are more pragmatic and function like engineers in a way that they focus on solving problems rather than justifying their ideology, that can be very productive. So economics should be treated like a tool for coming up with solutions for problems rather than ideological, you know, powerhouses imposing different ideologies on all problems one size, fit all approach is what creates trouble.

Prakash Mallya 42:25

Agree! The one innovation from India you wish the world talked more about?

Badri Narayanan 42:34

Of course, I can go to ancient India and say zero, right? So, innovation of zero was from us and, you know, and also the whole concepts of algebra and a lot of things actually originally came from India. And even a couple of days ago, I saw some historical accounts of even economics and mathematics and so on, and everywhere they start from Greek and Egyptian civilizations, but we don’t get enough credit. But then that should not stop us from innovating. So, I’m just saying that we should be proud of what we achieved in the past, and we should do more today, so that, you know the world can work. And imagine that Indians could have done that in the past. So you cannot just cherish your past glories but it is important to be proud of our past glories.

Prakash Mallya 43:28

Your most prized book, or author recommendation for ambitious students today?

Badri Narayanan 43:36

You’re talking about books authored by people in general, right?

Prakash Mallya 43:40

In general.

Badri Narayanan 43:41

You’re not asking my books?

Prakash Mallya 43:43

No, in general.

Badri Narayanan 43:46

General, yeah. So, in general in economics, right? In general in economics, I would, you know if people want to understand the basics of economics and then start implementing it in their day to day stuff, I would say should go through, you know, Paul Samuelson’s Introduction to Economics, Principles of Economics. So I think that would be a great starting point. And it’s not just a starting point. It can be a sufficient guide for anyone who is really wanting to get some value out of economics. But there are many other books I can think of, but this is what comes to my mind immediately. And if you are interested in getting a historical perspective of economics, a lot of books written about different strands of economics, schools of economic thought and so on. But I would also suggest some readings on Indian vision of economics, Indian Kautilya, Arthashastra kind of things. There are a few authors. One of them happens to be my friend, Sriram Balasubramanian, he has written a couple of books recently on Kautilyanomics and Dharmanomics. So these are very interesting which basically shed light on the India’s economic policies that actually worked in ancient India and medieval India, and how, what can learn from them in today’s situation. Yeah, so those are, like the first one I said, is the classic, neo classical economics that we can learn from one of the Nobel laureates, Paul Samuelson. And the second set of literature is about India’s approach to economics.

Prakash Mallya 45:40

Got you. If we have to teach one skill to every young professional today, what would it be?

Badri Narayanan 45:50

I would say logical reasoning, and you know, mathematics, right? So mathematical skills are going to be, you know, needed irrespective of how AI is developing. So these two, I think, logical reasoning, mathematical skills, and I think based on this decision-making skills, I think these are the three different things I would say everyone should learn about in the future, so they won’t be affected by any area.

Prakash Mallya 46:28

Good point. One word to describe Indian semiconductor ecosystem now, one word?

Badri Narayanan 46:38

Awesome!

Prakash Mallya 46:39

Very nice. Yeah, agree. So let me come back to geopolitics. You talked about geopolitics in your previous comments as well, and we are navigating, every country is navigating through a situation where they have to balance the trade and tariffs to building the local ecosystem and India from a semiconductor and electronics value chain point of view, how do you think we can have that balance? What kind of policies you could implement to maintaining that balance?

Badri Narayanan 47:17

So, if you take the Prime Minister’s coinage of wisdom Atmanirbhar Bharat, right. So, lot of people started thinking that we are going back to pre 1991 era, where you’re emphasizing on self sufficiency and so on. But self-reliance, or Atmanirbharta is slightly different. So we have to develop domestic capabilities, but then we also have to be a major part of the global supply chain. So we have to plug into the global supply chains. So that, I think, is a guiding light for domestic and international collaboration. So, we have to leverage the international collaboration to strengthen domestic ability. We have to develop domestic infrastructure, learn from others, invite others to come and invest in terms of manufacturing, infrastructure and so on and talent also, you know, we have to invite, be inviting to foreign and highly skilled, talented people to come here, work for some time, get some capabilities domestically. So, all these things we have to do, and the schemes like PLI and DLI are going to go a long way to develop this domestic strength, and this will reduce our reliance on any country for the framework and functionality of semiconductors and the electronics industries. So, we have to, like if you just for a moment, if you think about the US, the Trump administration one and two, they have been heavily promoting the domestic industry by increasing tariffs. Of course, the uniform increase in tariffs can affect them as well but the intention is to protect the domestic industry, whereas the Biden administration looked at industrial policy to develop private subsidies and so on. So what we are doing is kind of a combination. So, we are keeping our tariffs high and unless and until we have a free trade agreement and get market access to those countries. So we have to keep our cards alive. So, we have to make sure that we have something to negotiate with other countries. And at the same time, we have to be friendly with everyone and do a lot of give and take in terms of exports, imports, investments going out, investments coming in, and so on. So diversification of imports is really important. We may have to go beyond just East Asia, or particularly China. And definitely, you know, these trade agreements are helping us to do that. So if you see the trade agreement, the free trade agreements we have had recently, compared to the trade agreements we had like some 15-20 years ago, the new trade agreements are mostly focusing on the countries which can be complementary to India, who can be great markets for us, who can provide great inputs for us, like from Australia, we can get a lot of minerals. We can export pretty much anything to Australia. So these kind of things. So I think we have to have a very pragmatic approach to the geo economics.

Prakash Mallya 50:35

Fair point. So, it’s like a win-win relationship, is what you’re saying, where both prosper as a part of the relationship.

Badri Narayanan 50:43

Exactly, exactly. So, like the term I used to you know, like name our company, Infinite Sum. So, we should not get into the zero-sum thinking, but go for this infinite sum thinking, where the sum of benefits for the partner countries, both the partner countries will converge to infinity over time.

Prakash Mallya 51:04

Very nice. So in that role of building or journey of building self-reliance, how do you see the role of universities? You talked a bit about collaboration and consistency in terms of execution across state, federal, startup ecosystem, and educational institutions included, what role specifically can universities play in that?

Badri Narayanan 51:29

So, the universities, if you take in the US, you have been here too. So, in the US, most of the industries are influenced by university research. The university research actually dictates the future agenda of the industry, whereas in India until now, or maybe until recent past, I would say that the universities were mostly taking the best research done outside India, and just end of copying, copycatting to Indian context. So, but then what we need is much more than that. We have to do some original research. And secondly, we have to work on, if you’re not doing original fundamental research, we have to collaborate and partner on commercializing some you know, research breakthroughs that are happening outside India. Let’s say, of course, there are different parts, different steps in the path of research finding to commercialization. Indian universities can play the intermediate steps. So, you take some really great breakthrough that is happening in, let’s say, Stanford or MIT, one of our IITs, can collaborate with them to see how to, you know, make that scientific development and bring it to scale. So, they can focus on that kind of innovation. How do we make sure that the costs are reduced to implement that. So we can have that research commercialization kind of niche that we can do, and that is what ISRO has done a lot like, in addition to fundamental research, they have done a lot of cost optimization, right? So that, I think, is important. So, we have to identify our comparative advantage and use that to position ourselves with the foreign universities. I think that is one, one important thing so the university-to-university collaborations can happen. India already has some beautiful schemes like I myself have participated in that before, even before joining the government. There’s one scheme called Global Initiative for Academic Network, where the foreign people working in foreign universities, leading experts, they come to India, spend a week or two teaching a course which is never taught in India, some very innovative new course. And then that is opened up to young researchers, PhD scholars, postdocs and so on. I’ve done it couple of times on various topics. And that is one scheme which has been tremendously successful. And the second scheme is also, and it’s called Spark. It is to attract the foreign academics to come and stay in an Indian institution and do some joint research for a period of time, like six months or so on. This has become pretty, you know, prominent in many institutions across the country, and they’re also longer-term research positions offered in different institutions. So, these things are really good. And the same thing should also happen for Indian academics going out and so this kind of, you know, people to people contact, like academics to academics, individual contact, and also institution to institution collaboration, and also institution to industry. So why not, you know, IITs collaborate with Micron or Nvidia, so those kind of, you know, collaborations between the top industries and Indian academia also should be promoted. And I think, as I told you just in the beginning of this discussion, universities play a very important role globally. They don’t play that much of a role in India apart from the top institutions. That has to change so and it’s a chicken & egg problem because academics think that they are not heard enough by the industry, and industry thinks that the academics are too theoretical. That has to change. There has to be more interaction, even within the country, between the academia and industry. And some of these global interactions can help do some of these ice breakers. So if, for example, an Indian student is collaborating with MIT or Stanford or any US university, and also with Nvidia so on, then the Indian industry also will take note of that. Say, okay, why don’t we also collaborate with this institution? So yeah, these things can be, of course, you know, done by the government can play an important role. I already told you some other schemes, but even the private institutions, but academic institutions can take some efforts on this.

Prakash Mallya 56:25

Yeah, and you have specifically talked about the R&D commercialization piece, and this is something that you have mentioned in your past conversations also that I was listening to as a prep to this dialog. What is R&D commercialization? If you can explain to our audience, in the absence of local innovation as a stop gap, what you are, what my understanding is, you are commercializing R&D being done in another country until the local R&D picks up. Am I right? Am I getting it right?

Badri Narayanan 57:02

Yeah. I think I would agree with you partly. What you’re saying is one scenario, you can say that, okay, let’s develop our own R&D, but until then, let’s do this collaboration, R&D commercialization kind of collaboration. So that is what you’re saying is something that is pretty close to what some of the East Asian countries did, right, like they did slightly different. They did more like reverse engineering and so on. But here it is more, more explicit collaboration. So explicitly the scientists who are coming up with some path breaking inventions, they go, come to the Indian institutions and say that, please help us to make it more practically achievable, right? So, then there are two pathways from that, right? One is what you said, like you do that, and you also learn how to do research, and you also become research powerhouse that would be highly desirable. I agree with you. But I also think that this can also become a long-term equilibrium. You can always be a great partner with any country that is looking for R&D commercialization, right? So, and then also, there is also another point here, like I was talking about the steps from R&D to commercial implementation, right? So, to manufacture these R&D based products at scale, you need the cost advantages and so on that is there in India. So, these research institutions can eventually lead to that, eventually lead for India to develop a manufacturing base for these new products, right? So that is ultimate thing. So, what I’m saying is that this lack of expenditure we have in R&D, which, of course, in our vision 2047, we have some ambitious targets we want to achieve. But, given the pace at which it’s growing, we may not achieve that. So, like you’re talking, use the word of use the word stop gap, right? Until then, we can do this. If that never happens, this can even be a long-term equilibrium. The longer term, we can still keep doing this R&D commercialization, where we benefit from one part of the innovations in R&D, which is like conversion, converting that into commercial viability.

Prakash Mallya 59:29

Fair point. So, we have come a long way, Badri. So, I have a last question that I ask all my guests, and it is as follows, India’s journey in semiconductors and deep tech is not only about domestic growth, it’s about our place on the global map when it comes to technology and innovation. So, if you look ahead 10,15,20 years, where do you see India’s position at that time and what needs to happen today to make that vision a reality?

Badri Narayanan 1:00:01

So, one of the, I would say, you know, really ambitious goal that we can, we can have by 2047, the Viksit Bharat, or Developed India goal that we have is technology sovereignty and inclusive AI leadership, right? So how India can become a global technology architect, not just a consumer or service provider? So, this is basically the manifestation of self-reliance or Atmanirbhar Bharat, right? Particularly in technologies, these technologies we are talking about semiconductors, electronics, high end equipment, special materials and so on. So, this is to integrate technology with sustainable development and see innovations, not only you know, lead to prosperity, which we all know it’s going to happen, but also reduce inequalities, linking directly to the crosscutting the theme that we have in our broader vision, which is inclusive growth. So, we don’t want just to become great, developed country purely by increasing the per capita income. We also want that growth to be evenly redistributed like we wanted to be inclusive. So that is the thing. So, yeah, we have to produce a major share of global semiconductors, and this inclusivity that I mentioned now, we already made a lot of progress in the broader digital development, digital technology oriented development like UPI or, you know, digital public infrastructure, these are all great examples where we have made use of technology to reach the masses. So, I think that has become kind of like our DNA when it comes to digital deliveries and so on. So, if we can keep this and take it to a different level, where we can tell the world. Right now, I’ve been part of a lot of initiatives of the government, where I would talk to other countries and say that, you know, this is something we have done. You guys can also do this. And usually, we’ll talk about these things to the poorer countries. But in the future, we can do that even to the entire world. So, I think that, I would say, is a goal that is really, you know, desirable to achieve, and very, very challenging as well, but we have already made some baby steps in that direction.

Prakash Mallya 1:02:39

Fantastic! So that’s a great place to close the conversation. But is there anything that you wanted to cover that we didn’t cover?

Badri Narayanan 1:02:49

I think this was wonderful, Prakash. I really learned a lot from these thought-provoking questions, while I was making these points, I also had a lot of thoughts going in my mind. So, thanks for this, and thoroughly enjoy the conversation and looking forward to more interactions, thank you!

Prakash Mallya 1:03:14

Looking forward to it, Badri. Thank you! Thank you for your time and for our audience, do follow us, do like, subscribe to our channels. We are available on YouTube, Spotify, Apple podcasts and several other channels that you can find us. If you like a channel episode, please share with your family and friends, because that helps us to get the word out. And on that note, thank you very much for logging in to Chai & Chips.

Episode Summary:

What happens when you reach the pinnacle of corporate success—leading a global tech giant to the number one spot in a hyper-competitive market—and then decide to walk away with no Plan B?

In this episode of Chai & Chips, I sit down with Rahul Agarwal, the former CEO and MD of Lenovo India. Rahul is a leader who defies the conventional playbook. From running a global marketing hub out of Bangalore when no one thought it possible, to candidly admitting his preference for “detailing” over high-level management, Rahul’s journey is a masterclass in authenticity. He opens up about the “drug” of the semiconductor and tech industry, the brutal realities of Indian manufacturing, and the profound psychological shift of stripping away one’s title to rediscover life as “nobody.”

YouTube episode link:

Prefer listening on the go? Find us on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Key Insights & Takeaways

1. The Indian Consumer Paradox: “She Wants It All”
Rahul breaks down the unique psyche of the Indian consumer. Unlike other markets where you can compete on niche value propositions, winning in India requires delivering on five contradicting fronts simultaneously: a reliable brand, top-tier specifications, a great price, aggressive offers, and unbeatable after-sales service. Companies that fail to balance all five—focusing only on one or two—often struggle to scale in the region.

2. Reframing Micromanagement as “Detailing”
In a world that glorifies “big picture” leadership, Rahul offers a contrarian view. He argues that 80% of success is execution, which requires getting your hands dirty. He frankly addresses the criticism of being a “micromanager,” reframing it as “detailing.” A leader cannot rely solely on high-level strategy; success comes from double-clicking into the problems until the solution is found. If the results aren’t there, a leader has a moral obligation to intervene in the details.

3. The Courage to Choose the “Unsafe” Path
Throughout his 25-year career, Rahul consistently chose the path of most resistance. Whether it was moving from a comfortable marketing role to a high-pressure P&L sales role or eventually quitting corporate life entirely without a backup plan, his philosophy is rooted in the idea that comfort leads to stagnation. He believes one needs a radical change in perspective to truly evolve, even if it means facing the terrifying prospect of “doing nothing” after decades of high-intensity work.

4. Make in India: The Hard Truth About Manufacturing vs. Assembly
Rahul provides a sober assessment of India’s hardware ecosystem. He distinguishes between “assembly” (putting parts together) and true “manufacturing” (creating the components like HDDs, CPUs, and screens). He outlines four hurdles India must cross to become a global manufacturing hub: bridging the cost disadvantage against China, improving labor productivity, solving logistics/infrastructure bottlenecks, and genuinely improving the ease of doing business to reduce bureaucratic friction.

5. The Identity Crisis of the Corporate Leader
Perhaps the most poignant insight is Rahul’s reflection on life after the CEO role. He discusses the initial joy of “being nobody” followed by the existential restlessness of losing the corporate identity. He advises leaders to recognize that titles, power, and stature are temporary. True confidence comes from stripping those away and finding value in one’s own existence outside of a business card.

Connect with our Guest:

• Rahul Agarwal on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rahul-agarwal-1973476/

• Rahul Agarwal on X: https://x.com/rahul610

Follow Chai & Chips:

• Subscribe on YouTube(Chai & Chips - YouTube), Spotify(Chai & Chips Podcast | Podcast on Spotify), Apple Podcasts(Chai & Chips Podcast - Podcast - Apple Podcasts) or your favourite podcast platform to never miss an episode.

• Leave a review—it helps us reach more listeners!

• Follow Prakash on LinkedIn(Prakash Mallya | LinkedIn) and X(Prakash Mallya (@PrakashMallya) / X) for updates.

· Episode transcripts on Substack: https://www.prakashmallya.com/s/chai-and-chips-podcast

• Episode transcripts on Medium: https://medium.com/@pmallya2411

Episode Transcript

Speakers:

• Prakash Mallya (Host)

• Rahul Agarwal (Guest)

Intro: [00:00:00 - 00:01:19]

Rahul Agarwal 00:04

Firstly, the Indian consumer, she wants it all, a good, reliable brand, a good product when it comes to technology, the top specs, great price, with offers an unbeatable after sales service. Think there’s a degree of philosophy that goes behind something like this, and one needs a radical change in one’s perspective about one’s life. Look, when I quit, I was overjoyed. So the first six months are actually fantastic. I just loved being nobody and doing nothing. Okay, still, quite a bit of my time is being nobody and hiding somewhere and doing nothing much. So I think for the whole family. Use the word ecosystem to really fire you need a few things. First and foremost is you cannot ask people to manufacture here if it costs more.

Prakash Mallya 01:19

Hi everyone. Welcome to Chai & Chips. We have with us somebody who, after 25 eventful years in the industry, gave everything up to build his second innings in life. And the last job that he did at that time was CEO and MD of Lenovo India, during which time, India region was the only region worldwide to be number one in both PCs and tablets. And he also, in 2017 won the coveted IIM Ahmedabad Young Achievers award, from an alumni point of view, so which was very, very special. And since then, he has been involved in a couple of startups. He has also had a few projects running in the background. And for the folks who don’t know him, right? And I know him professionally and personally for quite some time, I can tell you that he’s a big foodie. He has a fantastic sense of humor. He travels a lot, and most importantly, he’s a terrific human being. So welcome to the show. Rahul,

Rahul Agarwal 02:27

Thank you. Prakash, pleasure to be here with you.

Prakash Mallya 02:29

Yeah. So this has been a long time coming,

Rahul Agarwal 02:33

Yes, and I’m glad we are doing it today.

Prakash Mallya 02:35

Yeah, and we are also color coordinated, yeah.

Prakash Mallya 02:39

Yeah. We got the dress memo.

Prakash Mallya 02:44

So let me start with

Prakash Mallya 02:47

you rose up the ranks in Lenovo, right? You spent a long time there. And India is a very unique market, so especially from the consumer and commercial business point of view, you would have seen a lot or different customers, partners and business environments. So are there one or two moments or milestones which you think really kind of shaped your leadership style, or gave a gave you a view of the market?

Rahul Agarwal 03:20

So I can think of two such decisions that I made which were difficult, and therefore they shaped the rest of my career. So first was when I was running marketing for Lenovo India. Lenovo then was a Chinese brand, and competition was saying it’s a cheap Chinese brand. And, you know, people had a lot of questions, but we did a pretty good job of building the awareness, building some degree of image of the brand. And the worldwide loved it, and they wanted to replicate it. And the CMO, the global CMO, then he came to India, he liked what he saw, and he says, can you do it for the rest of the world?

Prakash Mallya 04:03

Oh, cool.

Rahul Agarwal 04:04

And I was stumped with that question, because nobody had thought of that. Nobody had imagined that, hey, you can run something globally in the area of marketing, from India and they came the idea of a global marketing hub out of Bangalore, and he asked me to run it. So that was, you know, kind of a difficult decision. While it sounded very charming and very glamorous, because it was a global role, but nobody had done it before, so it had all the pitfalls of anything pioneering, anything new. And I love to really do hardcore marketing demand generation, really meet consumers. And this was kind of going to be doing marketing for the rest of the world. So I think that was....I took the plunge. Honestly, I didn’t have a choice. He didn’t give me a choice. Took the plunge. And I think that experience really was something I would not trade for anything else Prakash, it taught me skills that I didn’t have, how to handle resistance to change, how to do change management.

Rahul Agarwal 05:23

It made me more sensitive to the different cultures

Rahul Agarwal 05:27

all over the world. For the first time, I had team members who were placed all over the world. So I think it made me much more rounded and gave me a very different view of marketing. We were doing marketing for 100 countries in 25 plus languages. So while it’s a global MNC, and it had the it had a global positioning, global messaging intended, but then how do you really satisfy the local needs while still staying on the global messaging. So I think it was, it was definitely very different experience from what I had done earlier, and it honestly gave me a global perspective for the first time.

Rahul Agarwal 06:14

Second was immediately after that.

Rahul Agarwal 06:19

I mean, I had done very well in marketing, both for India and globally. And marketing sometimes can be a little luxury role to do, wherein the performance metrics can have shades of gray, and once you are branded a star that positioning stays for a long time. It’s a very flattering positioning, and which is what I had. But then I got an opportunity to actually jump from hardcore marketing to hardcore business, running a P&L of a large half a billion-dollar organization, and I didn’t really have experience of running such a large organization. And then you know that there’ll be a scorecard every quarter. You know, not a hero anymore. You’re a hero this quarter, you could be zero next quarter. So, it required a lot of courage to jump into that role. Lot of my advisors told me, don’t do it. You’re in a good place. But then something within me said that that’s the real thing. Well, marketing is good and marketing is very important. But unless you do sales, unless you run a business, you run a P&L, you’ve not really done the real thing, so I jumped into it. And I think that really, again, shaped me to do different things, bigger things later in life.

Prakash Mallya 07:54

Okay, so you talked about that was the real thing, and hence you plunged into it, despite your mentors, some of your mentors, saying, don’t do it. What made you come to that conclusion?

Rahul Agarwal 08:11

No, so it was, there were two choices. One was a safe choice. Continue the path. You know, there was a path being made for me to probably be the global VP in marketing based out of the US. And the other part was uncut, was rough, unpredictable, and it required courage to do that. So I just said that I’m going to do the difficult thing, and I just bit the bullet.

Prakash Mallya 08:46

So are you built like that? You end up doing more difficult or take more difficult choices.

Rahul Agarwal 08:52

I do end up doing unconventional things. So, you know, I tend to get bored a little fast with things. So there are two choices. One is more adventurous, even though it may be a little more dangerous compared to the safe route I would always take the other one.

Prakash Mallya 09:07

Okay, interesting. So if you look at you did a lot for marketing first, and then you ran the business for Lenovo in India. And India is such a beast of a market, when you look at from a consumer point of view, very diverse needs, demanding consumers, and at the same time, it’s hungry for innovation all the time. And are there any things that stood out for you about the market, key learnings or insights that you feel the audience can take a lot from people who are building businesses like consumer businesses here.

Rahul Agarwal 09:43

I mean lots, but let me just maybe bring out a couple of them. Firstly, the Indian consumer. She wants it all. A good, reliable brand, a good product. When it comes to technology, the top specs, great price with offers, an unbeatable after sales service. So you know, while somebody can say, but why would any customer want anything else? That’s true, but Indian consumers are they want everything. They want the best brand, but other than maybe one or two iconic brands, they also want the best pricing. They also want the best specs. And not all organizations can get it all right, true. And if you see the organizations who’ve done very well in India are the ones who’ve got it all right. So for me at Lenovo, it was all about getting it as perfect as possible. Now the reality is that we were not the most aspirational brand then, at that time, and it takes a very, very long time, and it can maybe never become so we worked with that handicap. Our distribution traditionally was much weaker than our competition, our retail footprint, the retail experience that we were giving was not that great. So we worked a lot on everything, brought ourselves as close to the perfect mix as possible, and we did fairly well. And while doing all this, you also have to make money, because you have to hit certain price points, but you have to also make profits. So I think all in all, it was, it was a good learning experience wherein we were always looking at some mix, looking at new route to markets, looking at doing something innovative for the brand, expanding our distribution network. And there is no rocket science Prakash in doing business in India, it is basically just looking at the fundamentals. And these are the five things that I mentioned. Are the five things that you need. The difficult thing is that, as the top management, cannot have focus on more than two. Okay, so if you are able to get your focus to maybe four or three, then you have a better probability of doing a better job.

Prakash Mallya 12:25

So you talked about price point

Rahul Agarwal 12:29

after sale, service, brand, decent, brand, then route to market, route to market, distribution and the specs and the specs, and, of course, the quality goes with the brand.

Prakash Mallya 12:40

Okay. And from where you sit now, and you’ve experienced startups as well now, any brand that stand out for you, that do at least many of them, if not all very well.

Prakash Mallya 12:57

Tech or any other industry.

Rahul Agarwal 13:01

From a tech point of view, Xiaomi did it very well, till the time they did it. And of course, then they got into some rough weather, but which is why Xiaomi became so massive, so massive. I think Samsung does a good job. Samsung does a very good job. Sony has got many things going, right, but some things, they’re not as aggressive in their brand and marketing narratives. These are some very, very good brands, great. I think Boat. Boat was marketing brand, and it did very well. There’s nothing unique about their products.. You know, they all got it from China like anyone else, right? But they build their brand very well, yeah? And they build their distribution very well. So it’s basically the fundamentals, and very few people are able to get this right.

Prakash Mallya 13:54

And leadership is a big part of creating the fundamentals and consistently building on top of the boring stuff, which most people would try to argue, you need to different things at different points in time. So are there any things that shaped your leadership philosophy and gave you either your global exposure or the jobs that you did, a position that helped you really build high performance teams, because most of the large companies global MNCs, have different priorities globally. You have to marry that with the local priorities. You have to have different cultures represented and really feeling included or part of your journey. How do you do that? What philosophy did you follow?

Rahul Agarwal 14:42

So while I was at Lenovo, we didn’t really have a strong global culture like Intel. You know, you spent a lot of years in Intel, Intel had a very distinct culture.

Prakash Mallya 14:53

Yeah, that’s true.

Rahul Agarwal 14:55

And you would go to any country, and people would behave in a way that would at. Head to that culture. Lenovo was a young company, still a young company, and therefore the culture globally was still settling in. So part of the leadership journey was to set up a culture for India, which would be distinct, of course, not in conflict with the global culture, and that is something we co created with 50 of our managers. I think that set the tone for a lot of things.

Rahul Agarwal 15:34

To me, leadership is

Rahul Agarwal 15:39

it’s a fine balance between being able to connect with your leadership team so deeply so that they feel inspired by you, and at the same time holding them responsible accountable for results, because hardware in India or hardware anywhere is a very competitive market. There is no tolerance for any mess, right? So how do you balance the two? And it was challenging because people, including me, do not want to be challenged, or at least challenged in a certain way, so my style was more direct, and some people struggled with it. Some others love the authenticity, because I would do straight talk and not leave anybody guessing. So I would say leadership was a constant effort. At no point of time I felt that I’ve excelled it, that I’m a great leader, because you’re always getting feedback, some good feedback, some not so good feedback, and therefore you’re always listening to the feedback, trying to improve, trying to connect better, trying to build a high performance culture, but I think it is not something that I can really articulate it clearly.

Prakash Mallya 17:10

There is an art to it. There is a science to it. I completely agree to that. But are there any behaviors? Are there any habits that you have stayed true to in order to accomplish those things, something comes to mind.

Rahul Agarwal 17:25

I mean, when it comes to running a place, you know, strategy and planning as a place you can do 5% of the time, but 80% of success is execution, getting into the details, dirtying your hand, rolling up your sleeves. And there were times I would get accused of micromanagement, and when you get that feedback, then you don’t know what to do. How do you handle that feedback? Because you don’t want to be called a micromanager. You don’t want to be a micromanager, but the same time, if results are not coming, and you see that some people are not really getting into details, then you have to do it yourself. So I was heavily into execution. Whatever success we had, I would say, not because of very innovative strategy, or any breakthrough planning, or any brilliant genius people. We have always had the luck to be working with good people, but I think the success is because of the detailing that we would I would get into so that was pretty close to my heart. Whenever, even earlier, if I ran marketing, I would really get to the bottom of everything. Not believe whatever is presented. Keep doing, double click, double click, double click, double click, till everyone goes crazy. But that is what worked for me.

Prakash Mallya 19:02

Paying attention to detail, I have observed is a hallmark of a great manager. So you got to get to the details, and you can’t do it at a high level, frankly.

Rahul Agarwal 19:14

But a lot of people Prakash, don’t want to do it. It’s because it’s just plain hard work. And when you become a leader, sometimes you tend to feel entitled that I have an army of people to get into details, I will just forget the big picture and quite often, and there are enough examples, the slips happen just because nobody looked into the details.

Prakash Mallya 19:41

And the other part you mentioned also resonated with me, and would love your opinion on it. My observation is, if you’re looking for no micromanagement as a employee, right, if you’re a part of the team, you have to earn the right to be completely independent. You can’t be joining a team and without any past track record that your manager is comfortable, he or she is not going to give you the latitude unless they’re comfortable with your competence level. So if you’re frustrated as an employee that I get micromanaged, you have to actually look at it from a manager point of view also that maybe you have not done all that needs to be done to build that trust. I’m assuming manager is all well intentioned, is competent manager? Do you agree with that?

Rahul Agarwal 20:31

Yeah, see trust. I mean, trust is the fundamental factor behind this. Now there are, the fact is, there are some micro managers. There are some people who, I would say, have a disease of micromanaging, who cannot trust anyone perfect, right? So I, you know, I cannot judge myself, but I would say that for me, it was more case by case, that wherever people were doing the job, doing the detailing and performing, then you stay hands off, because those people will get demotivated if you touch them too much, right? But you know, it takes all kind of people to make the world and make a company. So there would be different people. I agree that trust has to be earned and therefore to be left alone and not managed not leave aside micromanaged also needs to be earned, and I saw that some of the best people perform best if they’re not managed, not even micromanaged, though they’re so self driven, and when they are managed, something unsettles them. So you got to find who, which individual, which leader needs, what kind of management. So you were asking about leadership style. I think the best style is to be customized, to have the to have the sense and the maturity to read the situation, read the person, and use the leadership strategy that is best for that person.

Prakash Mallya 22:16

And that takes time.

Rahul Agarwal 22:17

It takes time. And there is, you know, and there are maybe a million books on leadership. I didn’t read any, but, yeah, you learn that, hey, this thing, this thing is working for a, yeah, it’s, it just doesn’t work for B.

Prakash Mallya 22:32

And all comes with time and self awareness and observation.

Rahul Agarwal 22:36

And you have to be also aware.

Rahul Agarwal 22:41

And you have to keep watching yourself.

Prakash Mallya 22:44

Correct. So you had a fantastic career, and you were at peak of your powers, so to say, when you decided that this is it, and I’m going to give up my corporate life, this was July 2021, what made you come to that decision? Was it an Aha moment or a certain set of things that came together? Because many people think about it, but very few people actually end up doing it. So what made that decision happen for you?

Rahul Agarwal 23:11

Think there’s a degree of philosophy that goes behind something like this, and one needs a radical change in one’s perspective about one’s life. It doesn’t happen overnight. There is no Aha moment, and different people have different views to it. I did what worked for me. I enjoyed my career. I think I really enjoyed till the time I enjoyed and then I started feeling bored and repetitive. And even before that, I had planned to have a second innings of my life, because it’s very easy to go on you know, you’re walking on a on a certain path and just on a treadmill. So one has to be comfortable with uncertainty, comfortable with obscurity, comfortable with no titles, no power, no stature or less of it, and also no flow of money. So it requires a lot of planning. If I look at my Excel sheets, which I have shown it to my dear ones, always, when I was 36 or 37 I started building a plan that if I reach this point, then I will decide whether I want to continue or not. So it really, it’s, I think it’s a mix of long term factors your mindset at that point of time, short time, if I were enjoying if I were loving everything that I was doing, probably I would have continued. So I think it’s a mix of a lot of these things.

Rahul Agarwal 25:09

And for me, I’m somebody who tends to think, why am I doing what I’m doing? What is the meaning? Why am I in this meeting? Why are we having this conference call? Why are we having this review meeting? And the meaning in those activities started decimating over the last two years, and then I was also getting a little charmed by the startup world. So I said, if I have to take a plunge, then I have to do it now.

Prakash Mallya 25:46

A lot of it is similar.

Rahul Agarwal 25:53

Yeah I mean you, you should also talk about it, because you followed kind of my path couple of years later. So what went through your mind, and how was it different from what I went through?

Prakash Mallya 26:06

Yeah, in my case, a large part was family not being happy. Seattle, combination of weather that the timing of our move. We moved because we had done like five international moves, and all of them had gone great until that point when Seattle didn’t work. So that was a big reason why I decided and what you said repetitive and not learning enough. Though, the job was fantastic. I learned a ton in the last job that I did. It ended up being more of the same. So that was the reason why I chose to just quit with no plan B. And I also had startup ambitions, so I did couple of startups, participated in them for the last year. It was tremendous learning. But it also, like you said, there is no schedule. And in the first six months of my quitting, I had a hard time. It was very difficult to have no schedule, which I did not think it will be a problem when I was quitting, and it was not the case. I don’t know whether you went through the same just when you quit.

Rahul Agarwal 27:23

Look, when I quit, I was overjoyed. So the first six months were actually fantastic. I just loved being nobody and doing nothing. Still, quite a bit of my time is being nobody and hiding somewhere and doing nothing much. I enjoyed it, but yeah, at summertime, you know, we are all victims of our background, of our beliefs, so it does start knocking you sometimes. What are you doing? Was it too early? And there are people who will keep adding value to your life. So there are these moments, like my mind has 1000s of thoughts every day. So there are times one feels elated, feels very fulfilled, feels very peaceful, feels very blessed. And there are times when a degree of restlessness seeps in, and you got to quell it, because this is how the human mind is. If the human mind knows that you are happy, it will start creating problems. So you got to work at it. And if you go back to the time when you were working and I was working, it was actually similar. Was it all hunky dory? All the time? Was it all great? No, there are ugly times too. So, life is same. It’s all about choices, correct? And you got to see 80% of your life what you want it to be. 20% will be difficult. And there will be times and days when 80% will look ugly and repulsive, but that’s life. And over a period of time, you know, you get more and more comfortable with it.

Prakash Mallya 29:19

Agree. I think we are all conditioned by our environment, and that environment, most time, tells us to just keep going at 100 miles an hour, which sometimes works, sometimes doesn’t work, and it is very personal journey is what I would say, even for the audience who are listening, two of us did similar things in terms of quitting with no plan B, but at the same time, we had different, similar, but different journeys as well, mentally passing through that. Yeah. Do you regret it at any time?

Rahul Agarwal 29:57

No, I mean, see, regret is more about policy. You can regret anything and everything in life, right. But regret is such a useless path, in my opinion, because you can never turn the clock back and you now, if you know that you made a wrong decision because the inputs that you were using were wrong, then yeah, maybe you should have the humility to say, hey, it was a mistake. But you, when you make a decision like this, it is based on a lot of emotions, lot of pre planning, and things may not work out, because success is not guaranteed. Even in our professional career, there was great years and they were not so great years. So then you can’t say that. Hey, was it a good decision to get into, let’s say, a P&L role? Life just keeps rolling. And I mean, my principle is that you have to have the courage to take the pick, the tougher choice. I would feel very low about myself if I were to play it safe all the time. Of course I would be, I would have more money enjoy the stature. But this has its own charm to me. This is more real,

Prakash Mallya 31:34

And both of us, I would say, need to be grateful to be able to be in this position as well, right? So that’s what I keep thinking, that just giving up and to be able to have that opportunity is not given to everyone.

Rahul Agarwal 31:51

Now they say the absolute, the utmost freedom in our kind of world is the freedom of time, if you can be the owner of your time and not be a slave of the routine that the corporate life demands. I think it has its own charm.

Prakash Mallya 32:12

True, very true. Yeah, and the part for me was not the title or the power. It was less about that, but more, I was driven by learning, and that learning comes when you’re part of something which forces you to learn at a quick pace. Have you seen that kind of getting impacted since you left?

Rahul Agarwal 32:38

No, I can tell you that I learned far more in the last four years than I learned in the corporate world, really? It’s a pretty big statement to make. The corporate life is pretty you’re sheltered. For example, while I was running a big P&L, I never had to worry about cash. Somebody would worry about cash. And because you’re a part of a large global company, if you’re running short of cash, because cash will just come in. Last four years, all I’ve dealt with in the startups that I’m involved in different forms, is cash. When you have a brand, people take you seriously. When you have a position, people take you seriously. They won’t meet you. The doors get opened. But when you don’t have a brand, when you don’t have a title, you only have a past resume, I think it humbles you, and to me, that is the real life.

Rahul Agarwal 33:50

So, to me, this, this whole experience, is when I’m using this word a lot real, but to me, this is the reality of life, and anybody and everybody should live without the titles, without the brand, to really understand how life is.

Prakash Mallya 34:15

100% agree, yeah, yeah. It gives you a different perspective, like even doing this podcast, something that I had thought about for years, and I talked about to you as well several times, but then I decided to take the plunge, saying life is not infinite. I’ll have to do it someday, but it’s just different from having a title and doing a job, very, very different.

Rahul Agarwal 34:49

Yeah, I mean, you know, when you look back, you can say, Okay, I walked or ran on one path, which I often used to say that in my last role, it felt like I was driving a bullet train. Tracks were laid out. The train was very well powered, and I had to just do something. But from that, you move on. You move to a forest where there is nothing laid out. There is heart shape, there is uncertainty, and that has its own charm. Now don’t you want both the experiences?

Prakash Mallya 35:28

Agree and the last two years, as like you also mentioned, it hit home for me, it’s been such immense learning, more than anything about you yourself, less about technology or any other thing which you can read, and if you’re part of the company, you will gather much more. But about yourself. Can you deal with uncertainty? Can you deal with having no schedule, no routine? So yeah, super. So look forward to continuing our conversations in our food journeys together.

Rahul Agarwal 36:05

Yeah, absolutely. I love, I love our lunches together, and I hope we continue on that.

Prakash Mallya 36:12

Yeah, so that’s a good break time to do a bunch of speed round questions. Okay, so let me start with, if you could give me one piece of advice to your younger CEO self, what would that be in five words or less?

Rahul Agarwal 36:36

Well, I could have been more patient with people and results.

Prakash Mallya 36:41

Fair point, and what’s a tech prediction you made that was completely wrong?

Rahul Agarwal 36:51

Oh, I don’t do lot of prediction, but there was a time when the online e commerce sales were rapidly growing, and I openly said in front of Flipkart CEO that laptop sales will never grow beyond 30% and my entire team squirmed. It was a little out of line comment to make, but I said, No, people will go back to offline. People do want to, you know, have a feel of the product before they buy. But I got wrong, because notebook then became 50% offline, online sales became 50% of notebook sales. So not a big tech prediction, but something I totally got it wrong, publicly.

Prakash Mallya 37:53

Interesting. So beyond work, what’s the one non tech hobby or passion that helps you recharge? I think I already know the answer to the question.

Rahul Agarwal 38:02

You know that? I mean, I am, I’m just too addicted to workouts, so I do long workouts, and then I do a lot of walks. So that is really something that I think charges me back. Not that I need to be charged back for what?

Prakash Mallya 38:26

For yourself.

Rahul Agarwal 38:26

Yeah, true to it just, just makes me feel very good about my whole self. That’s true.

Prakash Mallya 38:33

Yeah, agree, Chai or Chips when you’re strategizing for world domination?

Rahul Agarwal 38:39

Oh, I’m a chai guy, right from my childhood.

Prakash Mallya 38:41

What kind of chai do you like?

Rahul Agarwal 38:44

I like the traditional ginger tea, which is brewed for at least 12 minutes.

Prakash Mallya 38:52

You have very specific requirements.

Rahul Agarwal 38:55

Every day, I am very fussy about tea. You can ask about that to people who make fun of me and then say it’s impossible to give him the tea that he wants, but yeah, it’s 12 minutes of brew with lot of ginger.

Prakash Mallya 39:13

And who or which Chai brand appeals the most to you?

Rahul Agarwal 39:18

So we’ve been Taj Mahal users it for long, I haven’t tried a lot of other because my wife doesn’t let me try.

Rahul Agarwal 39:29

But yeah, that may work so far.

Prakash Mallya 39:34

Yeah, one innovation you saw emerge from India that genuinely surprised you.

Rahul Agarwal 39:39

I think innovation can be of any kind. So I, you know, I’m a guy who gets into operations. I think the way this whole quick commerce and even the food delivery, I think the way this has been perfected, that in about eight to nine minutes of placing the order, you get the things at home, which means somebody has accepted the order, somebody has taken the stuff out from the shelf, somebody has done the billing, somebody has done the packing. There is a guy who’s available there. He knows where to come, and he’s at your doorstep. I mean, it is something that I don’t think I could have ever been able to achieve.

Prakash Mallya 40:41

Remarkable. Yeah, any part of the city, any part of the country, yeah, yeah, most parts of the country, I would say,

Rahul Agarwal 40:48

So there are times when the driver is there and earlier we would say, okay, you know, you go and get it, but the guy will get it faster.

Prakash Mallya 40:56

Faster, yeah. I was having this conversation with a friend of mine, who was talking about, he had come from Singapore, and he was staying with his brother, and they asked him, ’Do you want Chai?’ And they ordered one Chai. He was thinking that Chai will be made at home. They actually ordered it from Chai point or wherever, and it came in no time, which really blew his mind. And living in India we know that is possible. Yeah, true. Okay, so let’s get back to our conversation. And one of the things that I really wanted to talk to you about was about Make in India, because, as Lenovo, Make in India was something that you pursued as a path within the country, one of the earliest brands, I would imagine, who did that in PCs and accessories. What were your observations at that point in time? What were the initial assumptions you made, or Lenovo made, which were proven right or wrong in the initial part of your journey of making in India.

Rahul Agarwal 42:07

So Lenovo, like the other brands, had a factory. So we’ve always had a factory in Pondicherry, but Make in India was never on my agenda. Okay?

Prakash Mallya 42:20

And why was it on nobody’s agenda? Why so?

Rahul Agarwal 42:25

Because there was, we never saw any benefit of manufacturing in India. The whole supply chain from China was so efficient. And once in a while, we did the cost benefit analysis, and it came out that if you manufacture, which is basically assembled, if you assemble in India, it would actually be a little more expensive, 2 to 3% Secondly, then you will have to also worry about the spare parts management.

Prakash Mallya 42:56

Service, inventory.

Rahul Agarwal 42:57

Inventory management, because In a large company, country like China, it gets used. But in India, if you have, if you’re left with some spare parts, then you got to take a hit on your P&L, and then the whole logistics, it never appealed.

Prakash Mallya 43:13

Which year are you talking about?

Rahul Agarwal 43:15

15, 16,17, the first few years, and the government also didn’t really push hard on it. It was never on any brand’s agenda. Prakash. Number one, number two, finally, when the government started pushing, and I think it’s a step in the right direction, because you got to think long term, correct, right? China cannot remain the superpower, manufacturing superpower forever. We, you know, we got to think of next 20-30, years, and India, the biggest benefit is leverage, the wages there are four to five times that of India, right while they’re doing robotics. But still, I think India has a good opportunity here to get into manufacturing. So government then came up with this production linked incentives into the 18 or something, yeah, that didn’t work because they were not very well conceived. Then they came up with PLIII 2021 or 22 just when I was leaving that I think they had taken feedback from the industry, that was good, and they also, you know, did a bit of pull and push approach. So they said, This is the incentive, this is the carrot, but then there’s also a bit of stick. So we’ll we really do want you to manufacture in India, but it was never a strategic play until now. I still feel it is not very strategic because we are still not doing manufacturing. We’re still doing assembly.

Prakash Mallya 45:06

And how would you qualify one versus the other?

Rahul Agarwal 45:08

So if the components are getting manufactured in India, let’s say the hard disk, let’s say the CPU, let’s say even the LCD monitor of a laptop. If these things, or RAM, these things are getting manufactured in India, then, I think then it makes sense to call it manufacturing. And some baby steps have been made. Some people may say more than baby steps, right, especially on the desktop front.

Rahul Agarwal 45:39

So it’s a slow cooking, will take time, but will it be, see how does a company look at any initiative or any project? Will it improve its competitiveness? Will it improve its market share, or will it improve its profits? Or will it motivate people? So manufacturing India somehow has not appealed to any of these four. At best, the government is saying, Okay, we will give you incentives so that your cost is same as that from China. So how does anyone benefit from that? So therefore it needs maybe long term, the manufacturing in cost in China goes up and India builds economy of scale, then there’ll be a relative benefit. But not yet.

Prakash Mallya 46:42

Okay, so you mentioned, and I agree with you that longer term, doing manufacturing in the country for hardware and components is the right thing, from strategic autonomy or building innovation locally, all of those points are, absolutely agree with you. But if you were to be given the pen based on your learning and experience of Lenovo Make in India, what kind of policies would you write to make sure it happens faster than what you believe is happening today?

Rahul Agarwal 47:17

So I think for the whole, use a word, ecosystem, to really fire you need a few things. First and foremost is you cannot ask people to manufacture here if it costs more. So you got to give them incentive to maybe make it a little advantageous. And this is the investment the government will have to do, because after three, four years, the government will not need to make this. These are investment for the future. Number one, number two, I think the whole labor productivity and labor laws, nobody looks at India and says, hey, yeah, this is a country we want to do manufacturing in because our productivity is low. We all know that, our labor laws are complicated, and who do they compare all this with - China, which is not a democracy, but that’s the competition, correct? But even countries like Vietnam have done so well, right? Third is the whole infrastructure, the whole ports infrastructure, the logistics, because importing so many things, so many components, is very complicated compared to just importing the product. So the supply chain for them, it’s a nightmare to manage 50 part versus one finished product. So can the government make that part better? Can the infrastructure really improve? And lastly, the overall sense of ease of doing business in India.

Prakash Mallya 49:04

And when you say ease of doing business, how would you describe it?

Rahul Agarwal 49:07

Red tapeism, bureaucracy, other things that come with all this? Right, so I think that is where we have not made progress, because people just don’t want to give up their powers. So, if these, I think, if these four things, they run in confluence, and I must say, while I’m somehow, I’m somebody who’s not, who does not hesitate to criticize the government that this government has the right intent, and they have made the right moves. Now, if I were in government, what would I do? Because to be in the government, to do anything is very difficult, because it’s so complicated. When you are in a private sector, it’s you just you can do it right? Yeah, so it’s easy for us to criticize. You. But I think the government has been consistent. They do listen, but it’s a anything in this area will take years to formulate. Mobile phone is a good success story, but there also we are largely assembly.

Prakash Mallya 50:18

Yeah, which is true, and agree with you that it’s a long game. Most of the ecosystems around the world has taken a couple of decades. Like you mentioned, China, even Malaysia, Vietnam, they have been at it for a while as well. Malaysia has been for a long time, in fact. And if you look back at your experience, the Make in India for Lenovo, did you see any divergence or improvement in terms of the buildup of skills or the buildup of design capabilities, or anything beyond pure manufacturing, which makes the assembling over time grow towards more value add?

Rahul Agarwal 50:59

No, unfortunately the design is still not being done in India, and I think that would be also one of the key milestones in this whole manufacturing journey.

Prakash Mallya 51:15

Yeah, a large part of the value is captured in design, in most cases, yeah, yeah.

Rahul Agarwal 51:22

So there are design capabilities, but none of them have really done anything at scale. See, we have good engineers, correct. We are good designers. And a lot of people in the US who design are Indians, but we’ve not really done things at scale here.

Prakash Mallya 51:40

Yeah. And the path that you see, given its long term, no question, you see movement in the right direction from where you sit or what your experience has been?

Rahul Agarwal 51:54

I mean, as I said, if you if I look at last eight years or seven years since the government started this, there are minor changes, minor improvements that happen every year. And then there is this whole tipping point concept that you know, if all the brands, let’s say computer brand start doing 60, 70% of manufacturing in India, which I think would come to about $6-$7 billion plus, if they show the intent to export, then the component manufacturers will come here if they find the whole environment healthy so it can happen, but it’s not, it’s not that people are in a rush to come here. It has to be cultivated, and the government has to get involved at the highest level.

Prakash Mallya 52:58

A large part is consistency of execution over a very long period of time. Yeah, very cool. Great insights. Rahul, so switching gears a bit, if you were to look at the India ecosystem, right, what are one or two trends or segments you see as huge opportunities which are in keeping with skills and capabilities of India to build product companies or companies in general, in tech?

Rahul Agarwal 53:32

No, I think you said it, and I think a lot of people have said a lot about it, that doing software development for a project is one thing, because somebody just tells you what to do, but building a product that solves the problem of organizations or consumers globally, and the ability to build a global product brand, I think it’s a great opportunity. Now, one would really wish that company like Zoho really become a global brand. I mean, what is so great in creating a ERP? If you look at the logic or the code of creating the ERP, anybody can create it, and it’s true, right? But then, how do you a create a brand, and how do you sell globally? These are the two skills that are needed. And I think this is a good opportunity here, because this is what, if you look at the Infosys of the world, or the TCS of the world, they’ve been wanting to do, but have had very limited success, because they’ve not, in my opinion, because they’ve not put the might behind it. It has been one of the initiatives. The top management says that in the next five years, we will put all that we have to create a product that will appeal to the Fortune 500 companies, I think that is one thing.

Prakash Mallya 55:05

Yeah, yeah. We have an opportunity, because countries smaller than us have product companies, which are world leaders. Why can’t we do it? Look at Europe, yeah, many smaller countries in Europe can boast about it, agree? So you’ve seen exposure across large companies, led large company here, and done startups for the last couple of years or so in variety of different capacities. So from a human side, right? Can you share some behavior or skill that can make a person stand out and do very well in their careers. This is a piece of advice for people listening.

Rahul Agarwal 55:52

You mean in the context of technology or?

Rahul Agarwal 55:53

In the context of technology or careers in general.

Rahul Agarwal 55:59

I mean, yeah. I mean, I look, I don’t want to sound like giving a lot of generic advice. I mean, my son doesn’t listen to me at all. And I think I assume that nobody would want free advice, but the basics, you know, do more than what is expected from you. Be proactive than reactive. People love employees who are proactive. People love employees who take initiatives. Don’t just keep working hard. My motto has been not just work hard, but keep combining the hard work with smart work. My theory is most people, including leaders, spend 60, 70% of the time doing useless things.

Prakash Mallya 56:50

And why do you think that is the case?

Rahul Agarwal 56:53

Because that is how the world is. Meetings have to happen, because without meeting we feel useless and managers have a need to manage. I think managers, they become more productive the if they’ll manage less. People who know me will say, look, how is he talking? Because I managed all my life, but now I’m an old man. I can say that you need to manage less. You need to have less meetings.

Prakash Mallya 57:20

You’re not old, Rahul.

Rahul Agarwal 57:22

Well by age, I am.

Rahul Agarwal 57:25

So it’s the basic things you know. Don’t plan too much. Don’t do too much of career planning. Just focus on today. I never focus on tomorrow. From a career point of view, just do a good job today. Do a fantastic job.

Rahul Agarwal 57:40

Keep taking feedback from your managers,

Rahul Agarwal 57:44

keep building good relationships with people around it’s very mundane advice that I can give all.

Prakash Mallya 57:54

Great pointers, and it’s very hard to do the basics. Don’t you think?

Rahul Agarwal 58:01

Well, yeah, I mean, I think I failed in half of them.

Prakash Mallya 58:04

I agree same, yeah, yeah. It’s very hard to do anything which most people do, is important, and you should do it to be able to consistently do it for a very long period of time. Very hard, right? you can preach to the others, but you’re doing a job. It’s hard, yeah. So last question for you, right? And this I ask all my guests, the India’s journey on hardware, semiconductors, deep tech is more than just about domestic growth. It’s about our place in the global technology map. So fast forward 10-15, years, where do you see India’s position on that map and what needs to happen today to make that a reality?

Rahul Agarwal 58:47

Yeah, I mean this, see, it’s a very good question, and I think everyone gets a little excited while thinking about it, and while replying, there’s a degree of hope, and hope is what we must all have. I don’t know one decade or two decades, but definitely India will be, will be right up there, without a doubt. Just forget the population dynamics. But I think somewhere you cannot talk about technology without mentioning India globally. Now what is, where have you missed out? Is pure play innovation, pure play design. Even if you look at AI, there are no AI companies in India. All right, and that is one reason why they’re saying the stock markets are not doing as well. So, I hope that we are able to build true AI while we are good at creating these models of quick commerce. But can we really do genuine Deep Tech?

Rahul Agarwal 1:00:01

So I’m hoping that all this will happen, because the Indian entrepreneur is a is an amazing animal, and to me, it’s a matter of time before some of them will jump onto it, because it can be done. It is not that you need to invent light bulb. And the innovation is not just inventing a light bulb or electricity or internet. It is all about doing incremental things and build some substantial, right? So, it’s a,

Rahul Agarwal 1:00:39

we don’t know why it’s not there, and there are a lot of reasons our blood, DNA doesn’t have R&D and blah, blah, blah, and they want quick results, and R&D and design take a long years, and, you know, the investors don’t have the patience, and therefore the founders don’t have the money to do it. But we’re hoping that will change. And that is my hope that in, let’s say, one to two decades, we’ll have 10 companies which will have global reputation of tech innovation.

Prakash Mallya 1:01:18

I absolutely believe so as well. Yeah, we can look forward to India really shining in true blue innovation in the future. So, is there anything else that we should talk about that we didn’t cover?

Rahul Agarwal 1:01:35

We can talk about anything, but I think this is good enough. It’s good duration.

Prakash Mallya 1:01:48

Yeah, okay. So, thank you very much. Rahul, I’ve always admired you as a person. I got the opportunity to work with you professionally and now know you personally. So, look forward to staying in touch, and thank you very, very much for coming over and doing this for us.

Rahul Agarwal 1:02:07

No, no, likewise. You know, I share the sentiment, and it’s great that we are now connected with our families also. So, hope the friendship will only grow. Thank you and thank you really it was, it’s an honour, I think to be invited to something like this.

Prakash Mallya 1:02:24

Yeah, thank you. Thank you for making the time. For our audience, please follow, subscribe to our show. It would help us reach other people. Please forward to folks you know, so that you can spread the word for us and do give us feedback on the kind of topics, the kind of guests, or the kind of conversations you would like to have with us. So, with that note, thank you once again. Thank you for being on Chai & Chips.

Episode Summary:

What does it take to build a semiconductor company from the ground up, not once but multiple times? What are the hard-won lessons from navigating India’s evolving ecosystem, from the early 2000s to today?

In this episode of Chai & Chips, I sit down with Raja Manickam, a true pioneer of the Indian semiconductor industry. As the founder of Tessolve, one of India’s most successful design and test services companies, and the new founder of iVP Semi at age 68, Raja offers a rare and candid look into his multi-decade journey. He unpacks the real-world challenges of capital, policy, and global competition while sharing his people-first leadership philosophy.

This is a must-listen for anyone building, investing in, or curious about the future of deep tech in India, providing a masterclass in resilience, long-term vision, and purpose-driven entrepreneurship.

YouTube episode link:

Key Insights & Takeaways

1. The “Semiconductor Drug”: Passion as the Ultimate Fuel
Raja describes the semiconductor industry as a “drug” – once you’re in, the intellectual challenge and tangible impact are so addictive that it’s hard to leave. This passion is the core of his longevity and his decision to start a new venture at 68. He believes true entrepreneurship is about enjoying the process of creation, a drive that transcends age and financial motivation.

2. The Strategic Pivot: Why India Must Shift from Services to Products
While acknowledging the success of the services model he pioneered with Tessolve, Raja argues that India’s future lies in productization. He identifies a critical global shift: the fracturing of the optimized supply chain into three distinct blocs—US, China, and the “Rest of the World.” This creates a unique opportunity for India to step up as a leader in the third bloc, not just as a service provider but as a product nation that creates its own demand.

3. The Founder’s Burden: The Art of Making the Tough Call
Leadership, for Raja, is about taking responsibility and making decisive calls, even with incomplete information or against the consensus. He stresses that in a startup, you cannot wait for 100% data. A leader must have the courage to make a decision, own it, and rally the team, even when they disagree. This decisiveness, combined with transparency, builds trust and respect.

4. Leadership is a People-First Endeavor
Raja’s leadership philosophy is rooted in empathy and treating employees like family. He shares how Tessolve’s success was built on hiring talent from small towns and investing in them. He believes that emotional bonding and genuine care for people’s well-being create a level of loyalty and commitment that objective, transaction-based management can never achieve. As his wife jokes, “People don’t work for you, you work for them.”

5. Building for India’s Real Problems: The Case for Frugal Innovation
Raja critiques the tendency to adopt expensive, Western-centric solutions for Indian problems. Using the powerful “driverless car” analogy (India already has “driverless” cars operated by drivers), he argues that India’s strength lies in frugal, practical innovation. The focus should be on solving real-world challenges like power efficiency, agriculture, and water management with cost-effective solutions designed for the masses, not just the top 10%.

6. A Call to Action for Policymakers and Corporate India
Raja believes India’s true potential lies in its “geniuses in the rough”—the passionate, undiscovered innovators in startups and universities. He urges policymakers to shift their focus from funding only large corporations to empowering these smaller, agile players. He calls on corporate giants to “adopt” startups, providing mentorship and market access. This collaborative ecosystem, he argues, is the only way to ensure India becomes a true leader, not just a follower, in the global semiconductor landscape.

Connect with our Guest:

• iVP Semi: https://www.ivpsemi.com/index.html

• Raja Manickam on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/manickamworldt2/

Follow Chai & Chips:

• Subscribe on YouTube(Chai & Chips - YouTube), Spotify(Chai & Chips Podcast | Podcast on Spotify), Apple Podcasts(Chai & Chips Podcast - Podcast - Apple Podcasts) or your favourite podcast platform to never miss an episode.

• Leave a review—it helps us reach more listeners!

• Follow Prakash on LinkedIn(Prakash Mallya | LinkedIn) and X(Prakash Mallya (@PrakashMallya) / X) for updates.

• Episode transcripts on Substack: https://www.prakashmallya.com/s/chai-and-chips-podcast

• Episode transcripts on Medium: https://medium.com/@pmallya2411

Episode Transcript

Speakers:

• Prakash Mallya (Host)

• Raja Manickam (Guest)

Intro Music and Preview: [00:00:00-00:01:29]

Prakash Mallya: [01:30] Hi, welcome to Chai & Chips. This is Prakash Mallya. Today we have with us, Raja Manickam. Raja frankly, does not need any introduction because he has contributed so much to the Indian semiconductor and the global semiconductor industry for a very long period of time. He founded Tessolve in 2003 in India. It was headquartered and continues to be headquartered in Bengaluru, and it passed thousand crore revenue recently, making it one of the biggest in India in test and design services and one of the successful companies in semiconductor solutions. He didn’t stop there. He founded at the age of, believe you me, 68 in 2024, IVP Semi, which is focused on building semiconductor products, reducing the development or design lifecycle, as well as increasing the strategic autonomy for the country. So, he is one person who has seen the entire spectrum of the semiconductor industry for over a couple of decades and has contributed significantly to it.

[02:36] So, Raja, welcome to Chai & Chips. You are an inspiration and I’m really looking forward to this conversation.

Raja Manickam: [02:44] Thank you, Prakash. It’s a pleasure. And I, like you said, right, you know, age is, you know, I don’t really bother about so much about it because you enjoy what you do. And you know, semiconductor is like a drug, right? Once you get on this drug, you can’t get out of it. So it’s a good drug to have.

Prakash: [03:03] Yes. Yes. I can vouch for it. Yes, having spent time in the industry, it is a cool industry to be in.

Raja: [03:09] Yeah. Yeah, that’s true.

Prakash: [03:12] So you started your career with multinational like Texas...

Raja: [03:16] Yes.

Prakash: [03:16] ...National Semi, you’ve done startups after that, you’ve founded startups. At what point in time did it really strike you to build semiconductor or contribute to the semiconductor ecosystem in India?

Raja: [03:29] I mean, one was, you know, I always wanted to come back to India, right? That pull for me was very strong. But like most people, right, you go to the US, you’re stuck there and then you wait for the kids to go to college and then you make a move, right? So I wasn’t any different. But if I had not made the move, right, at that point, I would have been stuck, right? It’s like you got to get off that, that superhighway if you may, right?

[03:54] So I always wanted to come to India. My wife is also from India and so, you know, and she’s very passionate about, you know, she does a lot of things on the education side. Okay? So as, as a couple, right, you know, it always has to be a couple. If one, you know, if the other doesn’t like it, yeah, it doesn’t happen. So I think both of us were very, you know, wanting to come back to India, do a lot of things in India.

[04:15] The other thing was when it’s basically on semiconductor, most of the Indian diaspora are designers and so on, right? So there’s, you know, in the western side. But fortunately for me, I started, in the manufacturing, in a factory in TI in Singapore. That’s my first job. So I worked my way up from being, you know, from the bottom of semiconductor segment in that manufacturing and then move all the way up, right? So I was very comfortable with, you know, Asia and factories and all those kind of things.

[04:45] And I felt that India lost out, right? Because I, I worked in Malaysia, I worked in Singapore, I actually worked in the factories, right? I’m not just visiting factories. And I saw that, you know, we have so much talent, so much people and, you know, smart people and so forth. But yet, you know, we couldn’t pull the manufacturing, I’m talking about the nineties, right? So I thought we missed the boat. So I was always trying to figure out, you know, how you bring this back, bring this back.

[05:10] And 2004, in fact, before I started Tessolve, actually, I wanted to start it as a manufacturing company. Okay? Believe it or not, right? I had a manufacturing plan, I had an OSAT plan, you know, 2003. But of course, right, you know, I couldn’t get any funding and so on and everybody said, hey, you know, there’s a service industry, maybe you want to try. And, you know, and I mean, I couldn’t get for that either from a funding standpoint, but at least it was a proven model in India.

[05:36] So that’s how I ended up starting, you know. But the pull to come to India, you know, the, the calibre because I also worked with a lot of, part of my National Semiconductor house with, on telecom. Okay? So I used to run the telecom P&L. So I actually visited C-DOT many times those days in the mid-nineties, 93, 94, 95 timeframe.

[06:00] I worked with a lot of young engineers in Bangalore and Delhi. And I said, man, these guys are so smart, right? But yet, you know, we didn’t get a, you know, place at the table. So all of this put together, you know, it was like, hey, I got to do this.

Prakash: [06:16] Fantastic. So you started as manufacturing, pivoted to design services because you couldn’t get funding. And now you are into productization with IVP Semi. What made you change or what drove the mindset shift saying now is the timing to go into products versus doing services?

Raja: [06:38] I think, you know, I think there’s always services, business will be there and I think it’s going to grow, right? Tessolve, I think last year they did about 1,300 or 1,400 crore. And I think lately you saw, you know, TPG picked up a 25% stake for, I think, $550 million enterprise value, right?

[07:01] Uh, so I think that business will grow. But my view is, hey, you know, the timing is good, you know, there are going to be three distinct supply chains that’s evolving. One is the American supply chain. Another one is the Chinese supply chain and the rest of the world, right?

[07:21] So it’s no more that optimized thing that we used to know, right? You know, global supply chain or something was probably the most optimized supply chain. So now it’s going to be, you know, pretty much three different supply chains independent of each other. And I think the rest of the world’s supply chain is where I think India is going to take a lead, right? You know, we’re a big nation, we have a big market. And the timing is good now with all the geopolitical issues and all that.

[07:51] And you know, I think the government, you know, central government, you know, Prime Minister came two days in for the semicon show and all, right? So the intent, you know, they’re making a statement, right? So all of that put together, right, I believe that, you know, we need to be a product nation because there’s an opportunity to build products that will fulfill this supply chain.

[08:12] So, and then the other thing is, you know, government has put a lot of money, you know, since last February into manufacturing, right? The fab coming up with Tata, the OSATs and all that. Who’s going to fill up all this? Right? Where is the demand going to come from? Right? And so we are going to be the demand creators, right? In fact, I work with the central government on this. So there’s going to be a lot more money going into demand creation. And demand creation is products, right?

[08:41] Then the question is which products, right? And so I think, you know, you peel the onion and you’ll get to where, where it is. All said and done, right, you know, product is a lot more fun, right? I used to have a slide to show where is the money in the semiconductor, right? You know, is it in the fab, in the OSAT, or is it in EDA tools, or is it in equipment? Where it is, right? And the product guys pick up everything. They don’t own anything, right? But you know, they make the most amount of money, right? So the product guys figured out how to make use of all of this without owning anything, right? And making the most amount of money. Yeah. Right?

[09:15] So we’re smart people, okay? We do it in other countries, sure, right? So I think, you know, product is, one is, you know, I think we need it. Secondly, I think, you know, it’s the right thing to do from a business standpoint as well. The final thing from a socialist angle, I’m kind of a socialist person, is that the Western solution is an expensive solution. It has to be an expensive solution, right?

[09:45] One is because, you know, they want to make those big margins and so forth. Second thing is, it’s solutions for the Western requirements, right? One example I always give is this driverless cars and all that, right? That’s a very key thing for all the Western countries, right? Because they, you know, they don’t have drivers. I already have a driverless car. I don’t drive my car, right? Somebody else drives my car. He parks it and I call him, you know, he’s there.

[10:13] In fact, you know, I can trust him more than anything else, right? About 20,000, 30,000 rupees, I have a driverless car, right? So that’s not our issue, right? Whereas if I go to every, you know, service company, you know, in this space, in India, they will say, you know, I have IP for driverless cars or something like that. So we’re working on the wrong solution in my opinion, right?

[10:35] So I think, you know, there’s a set of real problem that we need to solve, whether it’s climate warming or water or you know, quality of life or anything. Practical solutions, cost-effective solutions, that that really needs to be implemented and that will come from India. By culture, we’re frugal in the sense, but we’re also very society-minded, community people, right?

[11:05] So I think, you know, solutions that come from India will be a lot more is what the globe needs in the next 10, 20 years and will be completely different from what the western thought process is.

Prakash: [11:17] That’s a comprehensive solution. And we can dig into each of those elements during this conversation, right? The first part of that you mentioned was the kind of breakup of the supply chain. The US supply chain, China supply chain, and rest of world supply chain. Be great to get your colour on what has driven that breakup?

Raja: [11:41] I think, you know, I mean, the elephants are fighting, right? You know, I don’t want to mention names, but you know what it is. So we’re the, we’re caught in between, right? So there’s a lot of small nations and all that, right? You know, do you trust this guy or trust this guy? You know, one guy from a security reason, another guy from his own reasons. So, I think there is a lot of reasons why the trust level between countries have become, eroded, right?

[12:09] Could be protectionism or whatever it is, right? And then security reasons, right? I mean, who would have thought that in the year 2025, there’ll be a war going on, right? It’s just mindless to me. Why would somebody go to war now, right? But I think that pivoting of this, gives an opportunity where it’s not going to be like people thought that China is going to be the factory of the world, right?

[12:40] I always believe that after a while, you know, a certain size you become, you start to drop off, right? You cannot keep on becoming a monopoly, right? I mean, today is NVIDIA, right? A few years ago it was Intel. I mean, Intel was so huge in microprocessors that they had to fund AMD to stay them alive so they don’t look like a monopoly, right? So today, you know the story about Intel, right? So I think, like any other thing, right? So it always, it has to be distributed.

[13:10] I’m a big believer in distributed everything. And so this mega-scaling and creating this, whether it’s a fab and all those things, I think eventually, I’m a big believer that it’ll become more community-based, smaller, regional, according to the needs of it and what the people there can, can do and so on. So, I think there is going to be a lot more of that.

[13:36] And there are a lot of smaller companies that look at India as a more trustworthy partner in the sense, because we’ve always been very neutral, right? I think Indians in general are, I’ve done business with many different people, are quite trustworthy, right? You know, we don’t covet for other people’s IP in the sense, right? A very little of that, right? So I think there’s a lot of trust.

[14:06] And apart from China and the US, there’s a huge market. I mean, we probably be the biggest market, right? And EU, I don’t think they can stand by themselves. So they have to align with somebody. With all this happening, I think they’re better off aligning with us than the Western countries.

Prakash: [14:24] And the other part that was embedded in your earlier response was the talent. And you felt the talent is such high caliber in India and I completely agree. 20% of the designers of chips have always come from India. But that being said, a large part of them, though they want to go do semiconductors or deep tech, still end up in software. So what is your view on how do we make chip building or semiconductors more aspirational for young people?

Raja: [14:55] Yeah, I think when I started my career, from college there was a lot of tinkering going on, right? In the hostels, we used to, you know, guys who’s got ham radios and we used to build stuff like that, right? So there’s a lot of tinkering, right? And you know, with the light comes on, right, we’re like, oh, you know, how did that happen? So I think in the last probably 10, 15 years or maybe 20 years, it has gone more to coding and, you know, software and people like, you know, it works, doing something, but how it works and all that, right? I think the fundamentals were kind of not that emphasized and so on.

[15:37] So I had a meeting with, we’re doing something with IIT Madras, right? They’ve created this kit where you can do some basic experiments on current and power and all that. It’s like a kit they’ve designed. And when I take it to my hometown, my village, you know, and there’s, we started with eighth grade, ninth grade. They actually, you know, send some sine waves and see some square waves coming on the other side and actually see it, right? It’s so exciting. I mean, these are kids, you know, I’m talking about, tier two, tier three, small town, right? Small town.

[16:14] And I could see that they become more curious. So I think, you know, one part of it is, we need to create that curiousness in in people, right? Rather than just doing the coding part of it. I still remember the story when I, when I was in IIT Kharagpur, we had ECE, but we didn’t have computer science. So I think my second or my third year, computer science was introduced, right?

[16:45] So there was an option for us to switch to computer science, right? So half the class actually switched. But I, I went to my prof, right? I said, hey, you know, I’m so curious, I want to do this, right? Because of something new. You know what he said? He said, Raja, you’re a smart guy, okay? You like to look at electrons and stuff like that, right? Why are you going to this stupid people? You know, they just write something and coding. So I mean it was, you know, that was his advice, right? This was for not for too smart people.

[17:17] But of course, the guys who went there, they went and joined Microsoft after graduation, they’re all multimillionaires. And I’m still, you know, looking at signals. So, a different story. But I think this curiosity needs to get implemented at a very basic level. And by nature, we are curious, right? Indians, we are very curious people, right? Uh, and we, you know, our parents, grandparents, they all taught us, all the historic stories and all that. So I think we will get there very quickly. We just need to do some work at an educational level. And, you know, we’ll be a force to beat.

Prakash: [17:57] Cheers to that. Yeah. So, switching gears a bit. A large part of any organization, especially startups, is about leadership, right? And what I really wanted to understand from you is your leadership philosophy. So maybe we could start with during your career, the kind of pivotal moment or a failure that you faced early on, which really shaped your thinking on leadership.

Raja: [18:25] Yeah, I think, fortunately I started with TI, right? TI, opened up all their, you know, knowledge to us, right? If you’re curious, sky’s the limit, right? Even for a young engineer, right? You know, although I was, I started as a test engineer and I was allowed to do SPICE modeling, right? Which has got nothing to do with test, right? But it was just after 6 p.m., you know, we had some, you know, really gurus in SPICE modeling. So we’ll sit with, you know, sit with him and doing. So they exposed that, right?

[18:56] So I think, exposure, you know, to these kind of things was a very, very good thing, you know, that I learned a lot from there, right? What you do outside of your work, right, mattered a lot. And there was no fear, right, at that time, right? But I saw over time, right, you know, the management style started to change. And people, you know, it was wasn’t about, people were talking about, oh no, employees are there, it’s a people company and all. But really, you know, practice, it was not, right? The layoffs happening. I was, you know, very depressed whenever every time, even though I’ve never been laid off myself, but I always was, why get people get laid off and all that. Usually, a lot of times my boss get laid off, I don’t know why.

[19:53] So, I felt that, you know, the whole empathy for people, people were not in the equation at all, right? Especially with the American style, right? And more and more, right, if you look at all that MBAs that we are minting today and a lot of them are Indians, right? They become more and more of a spreadsheet, you know, so there’s no value in the sense in all of this equation, right? You know, what is the people part of it, right?

[20:21] So I think, you know, that was something that I said, look, great companies exist because of great people.

Prakash: [20:29] No question.

Raja: [20:30] And you can say that, but then, how do you make, you really are, you know, have them work in a mindset where we’re all working together to build this, right? If you are like, a gun for hire, you know, you come, you know, I need you for this and then I, you know, you’re done, you know, you’re gone, right?

[20:53] So that’s a different business model, maybe it works, maybe it works for Broadcom.

Prakash: [20:57] Yeah.

Raja: [20:58] But for me, right, you know, I, I came from a school of thought of, you know, right from my young age, right? That you should be inclusive, you know. So I was the first grandson in my family. My grandfather was like, you know, you got to carry my name and, you know, you got to take care of all these people, might like you, don’t like you, but you got to guide them and all that. So I think I had that, you know, the family kind of attitude, right? My relationship was always like that. And I always felt that in India, especially, the emotional bonding is more important than your objective bonding, if you may, right? You know, in the US is like, you know, you’ve met all these goals, we give you this money, right? Here you know, if you are emotionally bonded to them, they will go all out to, you know, do things beyond, you know, what you expect them, right? So I think the management style in India, although I was trained in the US most of my life, I was quite successful in, you know, building, I mean, you could, you could talk to people who worked for me. And my wife always kids with me, she says, people don’t work for you, you work for them.

Prakash: [22:07] Which is such a great mindset to have as a leader.

Raja: [22:09] So, I enjoy that. I enjoy that. So, so I think, you know, that is one of the things that from a failure, I saw that, you know, some of the Western companies were kind of going down. And whereas I felt that, you know, this was something that, we need to pivot to, right? To go back to the, you know, glory, if you may, right? You know, HP was something like that, right? The founders of HP, right?

Prakash: [22:34] Right, right. Yeah, such a great thought and from everything I’ve read and listened or watched about you, what strikes me the most is your leadership, right, your style. You come across as very thoughtful and some of the things that you have implemented, like you treat employees as your family. You have, in Tessolve, hired from small towns, trained them to really be excellent at what they do. As a leader, you have felt making decisions is very important as a leader and then as a startup, day one itself, running a professional organization, having clear accounting is very important. So these are all not really found all the time. So what shaped your thinking in these aspects on how to think about it and where do you feel you stand in terms of leadership in startups? And what advice would you have?

Raja: [23:33] So, so let me go through, you know, in the reverse direction what you saw, right? See having, running a startup as a corporate, right, with a corporate, you know, compliance and all those things, it was very important because I saw a lot of great startups, but because the accounting was not good or, you know, how they had managed, you know, how the moving around people and finance and all that, uh, they couldn’t get funding. Right? Not because, you know, they had a great product, they had good stuff, but because it wasn’t compliant in some ways, you know, the moment you approach, you know, any funding, whether it’s a VC or private equity, they look at it, you know, and they, if they see even a little bit of, they’re not, you know, happy about in terms of compliance, right, they back off, right? So, you know, you shut yourself off, right? So I think that was one thing very, very important. I said, hey, you know, compliance and all. So it’s always a corporate.

[24:25] And fortunate because I learned from TI. True. TI was one of the best companies, you know to start with for a young engineer. There was a lot of exposure, but at the same time, right, you know, they were very, very compliant on everything, right? They did. So that part of it was, you know, was a very important part that I know any startup, I would recommend, right? Because you tend to say, okay, you know, we’ll take care of it when we are bigger and so on. But when you’re small, you feel lay down these things, right? It’s easier to do it, right? When you’re small, right? So I was always, you know, compliant especially on the accounting side and finance side and so on.

[25:00] And then when you bring the people in, right? You know, again, right? You know, you want to see people that can question you, but at the same time, right? You know, some alignment with the, you know, with the thought process of the founders. Right? I think that is also very, very key in, you know...

Prakash: [25:23] Alignment to the mission.

Raja: [25:24] Alignment to the mission more than, you know, a personal thing, right? And we, you know, we ran into a lot of times, right? You know there, and I always say, you know, any company is a dictatorship, right? And, you know, we may all, and I’m very, very open to, you know, discussion and all that. In fact, I get, I walk down to, you know, every level and, you know, get inputs and so on, right? I used to have lunch with everybody, pull them together and make them easy and all that and ask them some very controversial questions so that, you know, sometimes put them... uneasy in that sense.

[25:58] But then, you know, finally you have to make a call, right?

Prakash: [26:05] Yeah, you have to make a decision.

Raja: [26:06] And you have to make a decision, right? Even you’ve only about 30% data if you may, right? Don’t deal, you know, do this data paralysis, right? More data, more data. I’m a very impatient guy in this sense. By the way, I’ve made a lot of mistakes, okay? It’s not that, you know, every decision I made is, you know, fortunate for me that I survived all those things, okay? But I think, you know, the leader must make the call, must make the decision, right? Don’t procrastinate on that.

[26:34] And, you know, people will respect you for that, right? Now, some of them within the organization may not like that decision, but you put them to, you know, make them feel easy, look, you know, there’s a bigger picture behind this. You don’t know what you’re doing, I don’t know what I’m doing, but, you know, you put me in that place. Yeah. Right? I think, you know, Infosys is a classic example, right? You got eight or nine founders. But Narayana Murthy was a guy, right? You know, finally said, okay, you know, and the guys who didn’t agree, you know, they left.

[27:04] So I think, you know, the decision-making is very, very critical. And, you know, people, once you make a call, everybody falls in place, right? So we have made a lot of decision in Tessolve where I was the only guy who felt that, you know, I should do it when the entire company, all my management said, don’t do it, including my investors. But I still did it. Okay? Right? In fact, one instance the investor told me, Raja, you’re holding a gun to, to our heads. Right? I said, look, you know, I don’t want to fire it, but, you know, I know more about the company than you do. Okay? And so, I’ll make the call, you know, you tell me why, you know, it’s all that, I’ll listen to you, but I want to make the call.

[27:50] So you must be bold enough to do that and be, you know, accept the consequence of it as well, right? So I think some boldness need to be there and believe. And people respect that.

Prakash: [28:04] And you, even if people don’t agree with you, my observation has been, if you can explain as to why you made the decision you made, most people will understand.

Raja: [28:14] Absolutely.

Prakash: [28:15] And then, I think the objective for everyone is to fall in line, like you said. Towards the mission.

Raja: [28:20] Yeah. I think mostly, right, I mean, people are very logical and so forth, right? It’s just that sometimes they’re so logical, they want perfect answers for that, right? And in the space that we are playing in a startups or, you know, you got to just believe that, hey, you know, some, something is five, 10 years from now, right? This morning I was in an investor call from, you know, Hong Kong, right? You know, some big investors want to, you know, come into semiconductor, trying to create this big fund, you know, that, that even government can become an LP in that.

[28:55] And so, you know, so the guy was talking, talking, talking and then I said, look, you know, what do you think, right? 10 years from now, how India will look, you know, the semiconductor, right? And, you know, he didn’t, I mean, he’s an investor, he’s, you know, a long, supposedly a long-term investor, but they did not have that, right? So I had to explain to them, you know, this is what I see, right?

[29:18] There’s going to be at least two companies, semiconductor companies, which will be in the top 10 in 10 years. Okay? It’s going to happen, okay? Then there’s going to be at least another 10 companies which will be in a billion-dollar sales, right? In 10 years, right? And is that going to happen? You know, it’s an aspirational thing. But I think it was going to happen, right? And this, you know, you put all of these things together, I think it will happen. So, if they, and then you go into a lot more details to explain why you think it is, you know, so then, you know, then the consensus comes about, right? And some people say, look, you know, I’m not comfortable making those calls, but you are and, you know...

Prakash: [30:00] Over to you.

Raja: [30:01] Over to you.

Prakash: [30:02] Yes. Yes. So that’s a good break to get into a bit of lightning round. So, maybe, uh, it might give a sneak preview into what Raja is outside of work. Okay, so are you ready for it, Raja?

Raja: [30:20] Sure. Absolutely.

Prakash: [30:22] So the first question is, which piece of everyday Indian life would you like to be chipped? From street vendors to cricket balls, just to prove a point about innovation potential.

Raja: [30:35] You know, one of the things, right, you know, all these IPL and all these, right? There was a time when Chennai teams were, I think was banned or something for some reason.

Prakash: [30:47] Yes, for a year or so. Yeah.

Raja: [30:48] And I make it a point to go to at least one match, okay? I usually Chennai. And then, you know, even though the matches was not going on and, you know, Chennai was not even participating, but these all these vendors were still selling, right? The same dates, right? You know, somewhere else is going on. So you just buy, you know, passing by the stadium and they were selling this things, right? And there were people buying it, right? So of course, Dhoni and all that was still lying. And I was thinking, man, that is really, you know, hardcore believe that they can sell this, right? I know some 20, 30 rupees or whatever, right? So I think, you know, I mean, to some extent, I think, you know, Indians in, you know, I don’t know whether it’s because of the movies or Hollywood or whatever, right? We live in fantasy land for a while. Right? And I think it’s a good thing in my opinion, right? It makes us lighter.

Prakash: [31:41] Yes.

Raja: [31:41] Indians in general are very happy, even though they may not have too many things, much, you know. But we are happy people in this sense, right? So that’s something that, you know, I really enjoy when I’m walking around seeing people, they don’t have much but they’re happy.

Prakash: [31:55] Very nice. Very nice. So what’s the most unusual analogy you have ever used to explain a semiconductor concept to someone?

Raja: [32:03] I mean one of the things, you know, like, my mother, okay, she’s, I mean one of the reasons, just now you brought up, you know, why I’m a first-time graduate in my family, right? So we’d been, we don’t have that background, right? So my mother was, you know, probably, I really don’t know, but probably she’s fifth standard or something like that, right? And so when I got this, you know, ECE and so on, right? So I’m trying to explain to her, right? What I do, right? And she’s very, you know, difficult to for her to figure out, right?

[32:40] And I don’t want to say electrical. So I said, hey, you know, see that the plane going up there, right? And it, you know, somebody is talking to the plane, right? You know, that’s what I do, right? The electronics and, you know, RF and all. I mean, couldn’t explain to her is, so, I said, you know, somebody is talking to that plane, right? That’s the kind of work that, you know, I want to do and this is what I’m studying for. So that electronics and communications is one of the things that I explained.

Prakash: [33:07] Very cool. Very, very cool. So complete this sentence. The strangest place I have ever found inspiration for a semiconductor idea was...

Raja: [33:17] Strangest place. I don’t know whether it’s the strangest place, but, you know, sometime when I go into this museums, right? And I’m, and my wife is also a history graduate. I like museums. I’m a big believer in history. Yes, right? That somebody has done it and, you know, how, how you progress into it. So I’ve seen, you know, some of those ideas that has happened, you know, many, many years ago with very little knowledge about a lot of these things. And that I find it very, you know, inspirational, right? I mean with nothing, right, you know, or, you know, how did they manage to figure this out? Right? Whether it’s astronomy or wherever it is, right?

[34:07] And so, okay, I think one maybe, you know, incident is, I’m very fascinated by planes for example, right? It’s a huge, right? Yeah. So many tons, right? How can they fly like that, right? You know? And you know, there’s always fascinates me, right? So everything about this, you know, flying and, you know, all of these things, you know, always, it’s a huge inspiration for me, right? And saying that, I mean, people can lift this thing, right? And, you know, and flying nonstop for, you know, that’s a marvel, right?

Prakash: [34:44] True.

Raja: [34:44] So I, you know, all these kind of things really inspires me. And I’m also a big believer that technology has a solution to everything, right? It’s only question of whether we accept it. So yeah.

Prakash: [34:59] Super. So you have to explain what you do at IVP to a five-year-old using only kitchen analogies. How would you do that?

Raja: [35:11] Yeah. I, I have a five-year-old grandson.

Prakash: [35:13] Oh yeah?

Raja: [35:14] I have three grandkids, but the youngest one is five.

Prakash: [35:17] Okay.

Raja: [35:17] So it kind of matches that. I would say, you know, he actually asked, asked me quite some times. So I’ll say, okay, take this microwave, okay? He knows that, you know to heat up something, right? You know, you got to put it in the stove or, you know, there’s a fire and so on, right? But here, you know, take this milk, you know, I’ll put it in there, right? And after one minute, it comes hot. Okay? So what is that microwave? It’s doing something magic over there, right? See, there’s no fire, right? There’s no heat. How is it that, you know, it’s going. So that’s kind of what, you know, Ayya does.

Prakash: [36:01] Oh, wow. Nice, nice.

Prakash: [36:06] Okay. It’s the last question. You get one-minute phone call from Elon Musk about India’s chip strategy, but he’s only interested in your wildest idea. How will you pitch it?

Raja: [36:18] Yeah, that’s a good, very good question. I was in Doha a couple of days ago. Okay? And I saw this huge infrastructure, right? You know, malls and highways and all that, beautiful, right? Huge, right? But there’s no people. Okay? You couldn’t find people in the streets, even in the mall, right? It’s very sparse. And here, you know, it’s just the opposite, right? And the people always walking somewhere, right? Congested, you know, streets and everything, right? So I would say, hey, you know, instead of making cars move and so on, why not we move, make the roads move, right? Instead of, you know, having trains, now, you know, so let’s say for example, a 5 kilometer radius, area, right? You pick that and you build something that you can hop on, hop off. So the rails will move, right? And so, you know, you can either walk on it or you just stand there, right? And you will get to your place, right? So every 5 kilometers, right, let’s say, you know, in a densely populated place, and we have very densely populated areas, right? You could do that. You remove, you know, the thought is the reverse, right? You don’t build more cars or more trains or more this and that, right? You make the infrastructure move, right? Rather than the thinking now. That’s a Elon idea in my opinion.

Prakash: [37:46] Who knows, you might end up pitching to him at some stage. Nice. Great set of answers, Raja. So let me shift back to where we left off, right? And you touched briefly on,some of your earlier answers is in terms of people building or the largest technology companies in semiconductors building for the affluent, which is the top 10%. And there is an opportunity in India to build for the masses, to solve problems which are very real. And you mentioned some of them. And what do you believe are those opportunity areas that startup founders in chips and semiconductors in India can take advantage of?

Raja: [38:29] Yeah. So, you know, I think one is, you know, fundamentally, right, if you’re just looking to make margins and, you know, things like that, that’s the western formula, right? But if you’re trying to solve real problems, right? For example, right? We’re, you know, the whole world is getting hotter, right? Getting hotter, warmer, you know, the peaks are, you know, pretty high. The consumption of air conditioning in India is going to go through the roof, right? Every summer there’s a shortage of air condition, right? You can’t even buy if you want to. Yeah. Right? So now, the West, I mean, there is a solution, right? But there are better solutions, right? They’re not just science projects, right? They’ve already graduated into actual stuff, right?

Prakash: [39:19] So you can do commercial.

Raja: [39:20] You can do commercial, which can reduce by 30 to 40%, 40% of the consumption, electric consumption, right? The number of watts, uh, you know. So there are a lot of solutions like that, right? You know, use DC motors, AC versus DC, right? You must have heard of current wars. Yeah. Right?

Prakash: [39:41] Yes.

Raja: [39:41] It’s a fantastic movie that I would encourage every, every...

Prakash: [39:45] Which one?

Raja: [39:45] Current wars.

Prakash: [39:46] Current wars. Okay. I thought of it as something else.

Raja: [39:47] That’s a good movie. It’s about between Westinghouse and Edison. And Tesla is there in between. It’s a fantastic movie. Why AC took over DC, right? Even though DC is more efficient. It’s a lot of politics in there too, right? It’s always about politics. So I think, you know, there’s a lot more solutions that, you know, one is, you know, on the power. I’m a big believer that you give me power and I can change the world. Right? You know. Because once you have power, right? I mean, literally power. You can create so many things. So assume, if you get free power, right? Imagine what all, you know, you could do with it, right? So my thinking is, you know, this is the way we produce power in this, you know, mega, you know, or giga stations and all that and then you transmit, you know, like my village is about 280 kilometers from Tirunelveli power plant. We get to my village, 280 kilometers. Yeah, right? And my village probably uses, I don’t know, entire village uses maybe 50 kilowatts or something. Right? And, you know, so you transmit all of this, right? Imagine, you know, if, if just about 20, 30 villages around there, maybe 1 megawatt is more than sufficient. We have a small power plant, solar with some batteries and all that, right? It will solve the problem, right? All this transmission problem. So I think there’s a lot of solutions, you know, power related. And once you have that power, right, that will, you know, give you more opportunities to create good water source, right? And so on, right?

Prakash: [41:41] Yeah. Even for the climate, it could be a...

Raja: [41:43] Yeah, you mean can kill climate changes, help in agriculture, you know, so localizing, right? Localizing, right?

Prakash: [41:51] Making communities self-sustained. Yeah.

Raja: [41:55] Yeah.

Prakash: [41:56] Great thought. And power makes me ask you another question. In fact, today morning I was reading about how scarce power has become with AI data centers coming up in US. And no question, it’ll expand to every part of the world. So how do you see AI and electrification in the lines of what India should or should not do and what could be the opportunities that it presents with the in terms of next wave of semiconductors?

Raja: [42:25] Yeah. I don’t know too much about AI to be frank with you, right? But I’ll tell you, you know, see, I mean, you’re with Intel, so you know, whenever you have a project, right? There is in every project, right? We are given a power budget, right? Yes. The chip has to work within the power budget. Looks like for this AI, you know, that’s out the door, right? You need a nuclear power plant apparently to run your chip, right? And that’s a given. I mean, you know, people are selling this, right? I mean, can you imagine, right? You know, those days, right? You know, if it’s, you know, one watt, it should be a one watt. If it’s 1.1 watt, you know, it won’t make the tapeout, right? So I think, you know, this solution, right? I think it’s a whole mafia behind this, right? You have to create, you know, energy, and, the oil companies want to sell more oil and all those kind of things. Natural gas has become big. Natural gas has become, yeah, all of this, right? So, you know, power-hungry solutions has become a solution, right? And then all the climate warming things and all that has actually taken a backseat, right? And you can see the last few years, right? So I think for India, I think we should come up with our own solutions, right? A lot more distributed way of doing things. Do we need this, you know, huge data centers and so on? And I’m not a, you know, I’m not a very, I don’t know, you know, between inference versus training and all those kind of things, right? But I believe that, you know, we have a lot of data, that we certainly do. We should come up with our own philosophy how we process it, how we, you know, use it. I think western data, a lot of it will be used for marketing and sales and how we, how people think and so forth, right? Social media, right? You know, do we need a game for every person in the world, you know? So I think, you know, we, we have different, you know, problems and different solutions to go after. The quality of life. So I think it should be a lot more distributed. I’m not a big believer at all, you know, in building this mega or giga centers. We should not get carried away with that. Give us time. Like, you know, I always say, right, if you give a problem to NVIDIA, and you give the same problem to a startup in India, right? NVIDIA will come up with a fantastic solution. 100% solving the problem. But it’ll be a very, very expensive solution, right? It cannot be a cheap solution because it goes against them, right? The same guys here, right? May not have a 100% solution, maybe 90% solution, but it’ll be a more practical solution, right? Because, you know, that’s how they are trained and how they know they try to solve the problem rather than. In fact, at NVIDIA probably has better solutions already, but they probably don’t want to introduce it into the market. You know, why would they, right? When you can make, you know, $20,000. $20,000 or $40,000 on a chip, right? Why would I, you know, introduce a, say analog front-end, you know,compute, analog-based computing and all. We have some guys doing it. Yeah. So I think, you know, um, from a solution standpoint, I think our AI should look different, solving different issues and should be a lot more distributed.

Prakash: [46:04] It’s a very contrarian thought and I agree with you that we have to come out with solutions which are very unique to our needs because our needs are unique. Yes. It’s not like any other country. Yeah, agree. You started IVP at 68, which is beyond incredible. So what made you do that and what is the vision for IVP?

Raja: [46:28] So IVP is, you know, focused on power, as I said, right? I’m a big believer in power. Yes. Uh, once you have given, give power to everybody, right? You know, then, you know, they, they will, the magic will happen in my opinion. So, I mean, you know, I enjoy what I do.

Prakash: [46:47] It clearly shows.

Raja: [46:48] Yeah. And, you know, people say I look young, young for my age. So I always tell my age so that, you know, people say, oh my God, you know, yeah. So I’m very proud of that. And I think I keep myself young because I deal with young people, right? That was a very good experience for me in Tessolve, okay? Most of my people, our, I think 90th percentile at one point was 26 or 27.

Prakash: [47:13] It’s amazing.

Raja: [47:14] The early years, right? 90th percentile, okay?

Prakash: [47:16] And all from small towns.

Raja: [47:17] All from small towns. I’m mostly. I kind of force it, right? My managers will say, oh, sir, you know, they don’t speak, you know, then we have problem, you know, because all my customers were, you know, American customers. I say, you give them a chance, man, you know, six months, nine months, they will be so loyal to you, right? And they’re bright, right? You know, they just maybe they’re not able to speak well, you know, you know, it’s not a city boys.

Prakash: [47:42] They have so much hunger.

Raja: [47:43] So much hunger, right? And I’ll tell you, you know, so many stories, right? But, you know, one of the things that the whole family, their family will be involved, right? We used to have family days where I encouraged them to bring their parents. Yeah. They were not married, you know, they want to bring their spouse, it’s fine. But, you know, bring your parents, right? I insist, bring your parents.

[48:06] And so many of them, right? Because they’re the first graduates again, right? You know, this kids, right? They would have sold everything, including their jewelry, everything to go put them through school and all. So now they have a job, they’re coming and see this nice office that the kid is working. And it was so exciting, right? And now, if they want to leave Tessolve, the parents will not allow them to do it. Okay? They say, you know, because they say, oh no, Mr. Raja has given you this opportunity, why are you, you know, loyalty and all these kind of things, right?

[48:40] Some of them, a lot of them got married to, you know, because they had a good job, you know. So, you know, so it was a whole family kind of, you know, so I work with a lot of young people. I feel younger, you know.

Prakash: [48:56] So true.

Raja: [48:57] And I’ve seen, you know, people who associate with the older people. They get older much faster. And my wife is also, you know, is part of this, right? She always says, why are you dressing like an old man? You know, she, she wants to dress me up, okay? So she wants me to wear some, you know, nice clothes and all that, look younger and you know, and if I, even if I walk a little bit, why are you walking like an old man? You know, so there’s always that thing about, you know, wanting to nudge that and say, hey, you know, you’re part of this, right? And I want to stay healthy, you know, I run and do things like that to stay healthy so I can play with my grandkids.

[49:37] So I think all of those, right, you know, just the pleasure of working with people. And technology as you know, right, is always intriguing.

Prakash: [49:46] Very, very true.

Raja: [49:47] Yeah.

Prakash: [49:48] Everything you said is a summary of the entrepreneurial impact in society, right? Employment. And you can dig deep into the country and source or hire people who would not have been given a chance. Right? So it’s amazing, incredible impact you have made.

Raja: [50:07] And I always feel that, you know, the MSMEs, right? Small, medium companies are where the innovation is happening. Okay? Will happen, right? Because they’re not ROI, IRR companies, right? They just want to make a living, right? So that’s one thing. The other thing is, the number of jobs creation is, you know, for the investment is much higher in MSMEs, right? So I also promote this with the government, right? Fund small startups that will actually, you know, let’s say, for example, build equipment. Equipment, you know, for semiconductor, you know, the big guys are basically integrators. So there’s a lot of, you know, I mean, Applied probably works with 10,000 suppliers, right? Everybody is small, right? And, so that’s where I think, you know, the need of the country is, right? And we have very innovating people. I mean, you look at Coimbatore, right? I think Tamil Nadu government setting up a park over there. Equipment park. Because of, you know, the talent there, right? Pune would be another, you know, good choice.

Prakash: [51:11] Great. Yeah. In fact, you and I have been in Malaysia and I’m sure you saw the same thing I saw, how chip and semiconductor industry transformed the country in terms of supply chain and the number of suppliers that came about in Penang and the adjoining areas is is absolutely stunning.

Raja: [51:31] Yeah. And it still doesn’t stop growing. They probably about 55 years now. I mean, they just keep growing and more innovations happening and...

Prakash: [51:41] Correct.

Raja: [51:42] The whole place has been uplifted.

Prakash: [51:43] Yeah, uplifted.

Raja: [51:45] I remember, you know, when I was in Fairchild, the first trip to Penang, right? So I was, of course, you know, I’m from Asia, so I know that. But I had to bring some of my guys go to Penang, you know, white guys. And they were like, oh, you know, Malaysia, right? We need to go in all these shots and all that. Hey, I heard, you know, there’s monkeys, you know, comes into the house and all those things. And I said, oh man, where are you guys living, you know? Go to Penang. I mean, this is so modern now, you know, I mean, this is, of course, I’m talking about eighties, right? So, you know, how things have transformed.

Prakash: [52:18] True. So, switching gears, a little bit on ecosystem, right? So you have been in the chip industry for a very long time and contributed significantly to it as well, a lot of it you talked about. And you have seen us as a country make, take swings at it more than once. Where do you see India stand today? And what do you think our policy makers could do the most to really take, make sure that this swing, we really succeed.

Raja: [52:57] Yeah. I really do believe, you know, if maybe three years ago if you asked me this question, then I said, not in my lifetime, right? But I think a lot of things have happened, on the ground. And also, you know, political, geopolitical, all those things are kind of enhancing our, my belief and also things that are happening on the ground.

[53:20] I think, you know, from a policy or from the government, right? They’re funding a lot of these big companies, you know, subsidies and so forth, right? But I believe that in this semiconductor specifically, it is built by passionate people, you know, smart, you know, I mean, you look at Broadcom, Qualcomm, Intel, anybody, right? They were not built by big companies, right? Nobody gave, you know, big companies money and said, hey,go and do some chip, right? They could have, right? But it’s never been, historically, right? Everywhere, right? You know, so it’s always been from the ground swell and then you get this geniuses, I call them, right? Who do this out of passion more than anything else, right? Yeah.

[54:13] So I think, you know, we need to focus on that a lot more. Take a bet on these guys, right? And, you know, fund the hell out, right? Maybe, initial days, right, you give them a certain amount of funding and see, right? So let us say you have 100 companies, right? And then you kind of say, okay, you know, these 10 guys, we should give them all out, right? Give them thousand crores, right, to build the next thing, whatever, right? Don’t give them 10 lakhs, 20 lakhs or something, right?

[54:47] So I think, you know, that kind of approach where you’re actually taking bets on these passionate people, right? Rather than the big corporates, right? They will do their thing, right? They will come in later, okay? So I would say, you know, rather than funding a lot of these type of companies because they will eventually become followers rather than leaders. If we want to be leaders, right? These geniuses who are, you know, scraping around, in the periphery are the ones who are going to be leaders, right? If we want to take leadership, if we just want to be, you know, me too kind of a country, right? Then give money to corporates. My fear is only that with all this funding and all that is going on, right? You know, we’re talking about one lakh crore, two lakh crores in the next few years, what would we see in 10 years from now? Are we creating, manufacturing centers, service centers for the foreign companies to come and use them and take, you know, benefit out of it, or are we going to have our own companies, Indian, proud Indian companies?

Prakash: [55:57] Like you said, solving Indian problems.

Raja: [55:59] Yes. Solving Indian problems is actually solving global problems.

Prakash: [56:02] And that’s true, right?

Raja: [56:04] So I think, you know, there’s a deep thinking we need to do now that now we’ve actually started rolling out. Where do we emphasize, right? And I think private sector has to step up in a big time. Today is still a very government initiative.

Prakash: [56:22] And why do you think that’s the case? I mean, I’ve seen more and more people talk about it. The government R&D spend is more than the private sector, which in India is very surprising. And secondly, even in the same semiconductor, I completely agree with you that there is a lot more happening on the government side than private sector side. Why do you think that is the case and what could be changed? What could entities like NASSCOM play as a contributor to the cause?

Raja: [56:54] Yeah. I think, you know, see, this NASSCOM and IESA, right? They are very powerful organizations in that sense, right? I mean, they’ve made a name for themselves and, and they’re the members, right? You know, if you put all maybe the 20 NASSCOM members, right? They probably, you know, their sales is more than 200 billion dollars or something, right? Combined, right? Or even more, right? So I think they have a huge influence on, you know, how they look at it.

[57:24] And I always tell these guys, right? You know, I mean NASSCOM is supposed to be software folks. But now you know, you look at it, right? Hardware, software, right? There is a link and, you know, it’s good business for them as well, right? So instead of telling the government to put more money or telling government what to do, I would think that NASSCOM can do something, right? Say, okay, you know, we’ll create a billion-dollar fund, right? You know, 20 guys, you know, each of you put like 50 million, 50 million dollars, which is within their reach, right? You create a billion-dollar fund and then, you know, look at some hyperscalers that you want to make, which is going to help all your, you know, NASSCOM folks, right? So things like that, very forward thinking and if you’re, if you don’t want to do R&D on your own, right?

[58:09] So things like that they could do. You know, private sector needs to set up through, you know, and granted that is hard to understand semiconductor business and most of the founders are, you know, in a way nerds and they like what they do. But for an investor to look at it and say, you know, can these guys actually build product and sell product, right? Because selling a product is different from building the product as you know, right? They believe that these guys are good designers but then, you know, now they have to touch, I always say - to make a chip, you probably have to touch 20 companies. It’s not like a software where you control everything, right? So these guys, right? are they capable of doing this? Dealing with the Chinese culture, Taiwanese culture, Japanese culture, you know, equipment, you know, and all that.

[59:08] So I think the trust level is very low. But I, I have a counteroffer, right? What I’m telling them is, look, these are the geniuses, right? You are big corporate. You know how to sell. You know how to take it to market and all that. You do it all the time, right? So you adopt these guys, right?

Prakash: [59:29] Interesting.

Raja: [59:29] You adopt these guys, right? And help them out. You know, maybe at the end of the month they can’t make payroll. Okay, you pay one crore, two crores is nothing in your thing, right? And you take them, right? I have an example, right? Let’s say, you know, TVS Motors, right? Venu Srinivasan is a very, very influential person, right? If he picks up the phone and he calls, you know, some automotive company and says, hey, you know, I have this, I’ve adopted this startup, can you give them a chance, take a look at their product, it’s, of course, you know, they will get the mind share, right? And all that he has to do is make a call, right?

[1:00:12] So I think they’re not connected yet. Sometimes I see this pictures, you know, like semicon, right? You know, Prime Minister is there and they’ve got all these people surrounding him, you know, photo op, right? And I said, what’s wrong with this picture? Where is the startup guy there? There’s AMD, there’s Intel, there’s Applied, there’s Lam, there’s all these guys. And you know, but then there’s no startup guy. Yeah. Right? So although we talk about all this, you know, startup and all that, but it doesn’t match. And that poor guy, you know, is, because Prime Minister is there, you know, he can’t even get into the arena. Yeah. So I think, you know, there is needs to be a balance, right?

Prakash: [1:00:57] A balance that is needed.

Raja: [1:00:58] Yeah.

Prakash: [1:00:59] Well said. So, if you were to, you worked in Valley, you worked in India as well, you talked a lot about what is needed for Indian ecosystem. So if you were to transport one aspect from the Valley to this place, which makes it better, what would that be? And what is the one thing you will leave?

Raja: [1:01:22] I think, the ecosystem, right? You know, Tessolve was trying to do on the ecosystem, right? Why people believe that they can do certain things, right? Because the ecosystem allows you, right? I mean, take chip manufacturing in the Valley, right? You have a guy who will just do the deposition for you, right? You can take your wafer, send it to him, he’ll just do the depo, send it back to you. And another guy will just do the packaging for you or something, right? So you can even actually split the entire fab process into, there’s so many little companies that will.

Prakash: [1:01:57] So hyper-specialized on one thing.

Raja: [1:01:59] So let’s say, right, I know how to run a litho, for example, I’m a litho engineer. Right? You set up a small litho shop, right? And you know, so again, right? My way of thinking is, you know, whatever you do best, right? You do that and you can offer that as a service, right? Tessolve was part of that, right? We wanted to create for actually for local companies. But there were no local companies at that time. So we ended up the usual servicing, you know, the big multinationals, right? So I think that’s one thing that I would strongly, strongly recommend.

[1:02:33] And these people are the people, you know, one of the issues they have, they don’t have capital. So if the government or, you know, anybody, right? Banks and so forth, you know, help in the capital, right? Give them a loan, right? You don’t even need to, you know, with maybe interest taken off by the government, right?

Prakash: [1:02:51] Reduced interest or low interest...

Raja: [1:02:52] Or let them, let the government pay the interest, right? I’m saying don’t even need to give grants, right? You be the collateral for the bank, the government can be the collateral or some private organization and then, you know, they pick up the interest, right? So to encourage this. So I think one is, you know, the ecosystem build up. I think, you know, you do.

[1:03:14] What I would not do is, I mean at least lately, right? You know, seems like the amount of funding that is going into, you know, this crazy valuations that are going in and then what has happened is, you know, the expectation of the startup people also has gone up, right? You know, initially, right? You know, we’ll work for, you know, one-fifth of our salary, right? You know, in the garage or somewhere, right? Which was a lot. Now it’s not, right?

Prakash: [1:03:46] 250 million.

Raja: [1:03:47] So now if I want to hire a staff, you know, for my startup, right? You know, good, let’s say, you know, power system architect or something, right? It’s going to cost me a one crore or something, right? So, I think, you know, this Silicon Valley, you want to be a startup but also you want a corporate thing, right? So, your payback has to happen later on. And I think, you know, that’s how you actually, I always feel that, you know, the moment you start earning this ridiculous money and so on, your focus is no more in running the thing, right? So, so that’s something that I will leave out in that sense.

Prakash: [1:04:33] Well said. Yeah. So, if you were to, you worked in Valley, you worked in India as well, you talked a lot about what is needed for Indian ecosystem. So if you were to transport one aspect from the Valley to this place, which makes it better, what would that be? And what is the one thing you will leave?

Raja: [1:04:49] So, what you do well, you can always pitch it and you can really defend it, right? You know, you can say that. But I think there are many things that in order to build a product company, you know, you need that which you don’t have, right? So how do you fill the gap, right? First of all, you need to understand that, right? You need to have the maturity to understand that, hey, you know, you need a team to build this, right? And you can’t just do it by yourself.

[1:05:23] And then the other thing is, you know, there’s no, somebody was, you know, I was just talking to a startup. It’s making a chip for automotive, right? Because everybody’s automotive, right? We want to get in automotive. And I said, okay, fine, you know, automotive is the flavor now looks like. You know, it will take three years for you to get, even if you have the chip ready today, right? It will take three years for you to get qualified and go through, right? And those big boys in that automotive, right? Whether it’s NXP or Infineon and all these guys, they’re not going to stand by and wait for you to come in, right? So think about all that, right?

[1:06:04] So don’t get too much carried away with what is the flavor and so on. But think about practically what you can do. And we got to also understand that, look, we are not going to create some earth-shattering new design coming out of India. Let’s be very frank, right? We’re going to be pragmatic. And we’re going to create something you already know, right? You know, you’ve come out of Qualcomm or Intel or NXP or so, right? You know what you know, right? So you’re not going to create something, you know, and because our system doesn’t also allow you. See, NVIDIA, right? He didn’t know he was going to do what, you know. And Jensen will tell you that. After 30 years, they figured. And it was the right time, right place, right? I mean, the GPU was dying, right? And then, you know, upon this AI thing, they’ll say, oh, we need a lot of computing. Okay, you know.

[1:07:02] So I think, most of the startup guys bank on what they can do, but what they cannot do, you know, is where the realization happens. And then, you know, you bring the right people or right consulting or the right funding in order to to fill that gap.

Prakash: [1:07:22] Okay. And to that end, given that you have seen it from so many different vantage points, what is the one thing about semiconductor industry that frustrates you the most that you would advise and a startup founder or an innovator on?

Raja: [1:07:41] I think the biggest challenge I see is in manufacturing for a startup, right? You know, the moment your tapeout, right, it goes into a black box, right? You don’t know what is happening there, you don’t understand pricing, you don’t understand what you could do, right? You know, maybe you could tweak a particular process and make your product better. So, you know, it’s very frustrating in that sense, right? You know, you could have the best design, but then you could never get it out. Right?

[1:08:15] So I think if there is something that whether it’s the government or the influence of this big industrial people, to give you a hand in managing that, or, you know, even today, right, there’s the Hong Kong investor, he said, oh, India’s going to be a powerhouse. It’s going to be a semiconductor powerhouse. We all know that. I mean, this is, you know, Hong Kong guy is saying it, right? So I think that that belief, right? And so you project bigger than you are, okay?

[1:08:50] You know, Tessolve, right? You know, when we were in the early stages, right? I know what we were doing in terms of sales and not being able to meet even payroll, okay? But the outside world, right? Including IISC and all that, they’re like, oh my God, you know, these guys are doing thousand crores and this and that, right? I mean, I’m talking about, you know, 10, 15 years ago, okay? So we managed to create this, right? I mean, we didn’t actually do it, but somehow, you know, it came out that way. So I think, you know, the belief that, you know, you could be bigger.

Prakash: [1:09:22] The self-confidence.

Raja: [1:09:23] The confidence that, hey, you know, yeah, you know, so what, you know, I think that it goes to the next level, the next. A lot of our founders are, you know, it’s like maybe it’s part of our culture, right?

Prakash: [1:09:38] A little timid.

Raja: [1:09:39] A little timid, yeah. You look at, you know, founders in the US. Yeah. Right? Very aggressive. there’s no tomorrow, right? Hey, you know, I can do this, you know?

Prakash: [1:09:50] Well, yeah. Some element of fake it till you make it, as they say. So we come a long way, Raja. I have a final question that I ask all my guests, which is this that India’s path towards semiconductors and deep tech is not only about domestic growth, it’s our place in the world when it comes to technology. So if you look out 10, 15, 20 years, what do you believe is India’s vision at that time or execution at that time? And what needs to happen today to make that vision a reality?

Raja: [1:10:28] Yeah, great question. See, you know, the semi market is supposed to be a trillion market, right? So basically doubling in the next eight to 10 years, right? We all believe that, right? Because of the usage of semiconductor and so on. Now, so what has happened in the last 60 odd years, right? We’re trying to squeeze it in the 10 years, right? So how are we going to make that happen? It cannot happen without India or Indians, okay? Because, you know, the size, you know, you’re trying to, you know, where is the talent going to come from, right? Where is the resource, right? Where is the market and so on. So I think, you know, as much as India wants to get into semiconductor, I think semiconductor needs India even more, right? In order to reach this.

[1:11:18] So I’m a firm believer that, you know, we’ll have a seat at the table regardless, okay? Now, can we take a leadership position? Can we set standards? Can we, you know, deal in the forefront of this? I think, you know, just like Reliance Jio or something, right? You didn’t hear about what, 10, 12 years ago? Right? Today they are number one, right? So I think, you know, there are opportunities like that. I think, you know, we will create certain companies or, you know, certain solutions. And I’d say when I say semiconductor, I’m not restricting to, you know, just a chip. It could be a subsystems, could be modules, so solutions, right? So I think, you know, we will provide entire solutions and so on, I think to go.

[1:12:07] Where I think, you know, the government can help is with all the use cases, right? Fund the use cases, right? So that gets proven.

Prakash: [1:12:17] There is demand.

Raja: [1:12:17] There’s demand. There’s proven, right? For example, I got to prove it. The one I told you about the air conditioning, right? I have the air conditioning. I have one ton, one and a half ton air conditioner, which can give you 30, 40% cheaper consumption. Yeah. I have it. Okay, right? But it’s got, of course, the incumbents don’t want it, right?

Prakash: [1:12:36] That’s true.

Raja: [1:12:37] Right? You know, if they can sell something, you know, for a much higher price, why would they want to do?

Prakash: [1:12:44] Why would they, yeah.

Raja: [1:12:45] So now, you know, the government could be a good case, you know, use case, right? You know, the secretariat in Tamil Nadu has probably, I don’t know, 200, 300 aircon, you know, one, one and a half tons sitting everywhere, right? Let’s say you give me, you know, and I can show, right?

Prakash: [1:13:06] The comparison.

Raja: [1:13:06] Comparison, right? So I think, you know, the government can help with a lot of the use cases. Give them the opportunity there, fund some of the use cases. They publish it, certify it. So, just like China, right? You know, there’s always a China standard, right? So why not, right? You know, create those kind of standards and certifications and all that. So the use cases is very important. And we have use cases, right? Because of the population we have and all that. My sister is a doctor, right? And, you know, Indian doctors who studied here and practiced here, then went by, went to the US and all that. One of the big difference they have is, you know, they used to see, my sister probably saw like 70, 80 cases a day, right? Whereas you see like five, you know, you’ll be lucky if you see five there, right? So, you know, now you talk about AI and, you know, training and inference. We already have that. By default. Our training was, you know, training cases we had, you know, thousands with you, right? So, yeah. So I think, you know, India has all the chaos that we have. So I think, you know, government helping them, you know in this situations, right?

Prakash: [1:14:24] Yeah, in the initial phase. Leadership. Fantastic. So is there anything else that you wanted to touch on that we didn’t cover?

Raja: [1:14:34] My message is this, right? You know, we have geniuses in our society, right? They are the future, right? Just like diamond in the rough, they’re everywhere. You can’t see it. Adopt them, find them, right? Put some, you know, money behind them, coach them, just like if you would do your own kid, right? If your kid wants to be, you know, good in basketball, you know, you would put all the money, you know, or a violinist, right? You’ll send him to all the violin schools and this and that, right? We have a lot of this geniuses that are in our midst. You know, whether it’s in school, high school, or, you know, in institutions, you know, maybe every graduating class, right? You pick two who are thinkers and, not just academically, right? Things like that and then, you know, get the industry to adopt them and build them out. And, you know, even in industries, right? You know, we find some of them are exceptional, right? You know, create some opportunities for them. Because they are our future, right? If we don’t believe in them and you know, then, you know, how will we...

Prakash: [1:15:53] Nothing. Nothing really happens without, yeah.

Raja: [1:15:57] Imagine, right? If these geniuses are in the US or Germany or somewhere, right? They will be instantly recognized, right? So to me, the startups are the geniuses.

Prakash: [1:16:06] Yeah. Fantastic. That’s a great place to close it. Thank you, Raja.

Raja: [1:16:10] Thank you. Thank you for coming.

Prakash: [1:16:11] It’s been a pleasure. It’s been an absolute pleasure.

Raja: [1:16:13] Appreciate you coming over and...

Prakash: [1:16:15] For our audience, please follow us, please subscribe to our channel. The sessions that we do is base for you to provide us feedback on what kind of innovators, what kind of startup founders, what kind of conversations you would like to see or hear or listen to. So, thank you very much for your time and see you next time.

Episode Summary:

What does it take to build a deep-tech semiconductor company from the ground up in India? How does a founder navigate the challenges of patient capital, ecosystem gaps, and global competition while staying true to a long-term vision?

In this episode of Chai & Chips, I sit down with Parag Naik, a tech legend, serial entrepreneur, and the Co-founder & CEO of Saankhya Labs. Parag offers a rare and candid look into his multi-decade journey, from naming his startups based on Sanskrit philosophy and KSRTC buses to building globally recognized technology. He unpacks the real-world challenges and immense opportunities within India’s semiconductor landscape, providing a masterclass in resilience, innovation, and the spiritual side of entrepreneurship.

This is a must-listen for anyone building, investing in, or curious about the future of deep tech in India.

YouTube episode link:

Key Insights & Takeaways

1. The Founder’s Journey as a Crucible: Creativity, Resilience, and an Outsider’s Edge
Parag’s early life, marked by moving through six different schools and spending formative years on a farmhouse away from the city, was not a disadvantage but a crucible for creativity and resilience. He argues that a “stint in nature” is crucial for building imagination, as it forces you to keep yourself busy and think from first principles. This constant state of being an “outsider” fostered an ability to connect with diverse people and cultures, a trait that proved invaluable in building teams and understanding markets.

2. The Art of Naming: Identity, Vision, and a Touch of Serendipity
The names of Parag’s companies, Vayavya Labs and Saankhya Labs, are not just labels but reflections of their origin and philosophy.

• Vayavya: The name, meaning “north-west” in Sanskrit, was inspired by a KSRTC bus from the “Vayavya” (North-West) division of Karnataka passing by during a brainstorming session in Belgaum. It was a conscious choice to embed a local, Indian flavor into their identity.

• Saankhya: Often confused with “Sankhya” (number), “Saankhya” is a deep philosophical concept from the Bhagavad Gita representing knowledge and logic. This name reflects the company’s ambition to tackle complex problems from a fundamental, first-principles perspective.

3. The Four Pillars of India’s Chip Ecosystem: Strengths, Gaps, and the Path Forward
Parag provides a clear-eyed analysis of India’s semiconductor ecosystem, breaking it down into four critical areas:

• OEMs (Original Equipment Manufacturers): A major weakness. India has very few OEMs building end-products, which limits the domestic market for chips.

• Fabless Companies: Companies that supply chips to OEMs. This area is nascent but growing.

• Manufacturing: The ecosystem is currently very nascent and will take the longest time to mature. While policy is helping, it’s a long-term game.

• Design: This is India’s core strength. The country has a massive talent pool, and Parag believes a globally significant design company can emerge from India in the next 5-10 years. This is where the most immediate value lies.

4. The “Godfather Customer” and Patient Capital
A critical missing piece in India’s ecosystem is the “Godfather Customer”—a lead buyer who sees the potential in a 70% ready product and actively helps pull it through to 100% completion. Unlike in the US, where defence or large corporations often play this role, Indian startups struggle to find this crucial partner. This, combined with a venture capital ecosystem that has historically lacked the patience for deep-tech’s long gestation cycles, creates significant hurdles.

5. The Spiritual Journey of Entrepreneurship: Humility, Self-Discovery, and Purpose
For Parag, the startup journey is profoundly spiritual. It’s a path of self-discovery where founders confront their deepest fears and greatest strengths. He emphasizes two key lessons:

• Living vs. Livelihood: Citing actor Dev Anand, Parag argues, “Living is primary, livelihood is secondary.” True entrepreneurship is driven by the passion for creating, not just the pursuit of wealth.

• Power as a Test of Character: The best way to test a person’s character is to give them power. How you behave when you have leverage and success defines you far more than how you act during a struggle.

Connect with our Guest:

• Saankhya Labs (acquired by Tejas Networks): https://www.tejasnetworks.com/

• Parag Naik on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/parag-naik-38a5944/

Follow Chai & Chips:

• Subscribe on YouTube(Chai & Chips - YouTube), Spotify(Chai & Chips Podcast | Podcast on Spotify), Apple Podcasts(Chai & Chips Podcast - Podcast - Apple Podcasts) or your favourite podcast platform to never miss an episode.

• Leave a review—it helps us reach more listeners!

• Follow Prakash on LinkedIn(Prakash Mallya | LinkedIn) and X(Prakash Mallya (@PrakashMallya) / X) for updates.

· Episode transcripts on Substack: https://www.prakashmallya.com/s/chai-and-chips-podcast

• Episode transcripts on Medium: https://medium.com/@pmallya2411

Episode Transcript

Speakers:

• Prakash Mallya (Host)

• Parag Naik (Guest)

(00:00) (Intro Music)

(02:02) Prakash Mallya: Hi everyone, welcome to Chai and Chips. This is Prakash Mallya. Today we have with us Parag Naik. Parag is a legend, I would say. He is a tech serial entrepreneur. He’s the co-founder and CEO of Saankhya Labs that he has led since its inception in 2007. He didn’t stop there. He co-founded multiple companies before that. Most recently being the one that got acquired by Genesis Microchip, if I’m not wrong. And also before that, a company, a cool named company called Vayavya Labs. And we’ll talk about why he named Vayavya, Vayavya. He’s done tremendously, a great deal, I must say for semiconductor and hardware ecosystem in specifically Bangalore, the tech capital of the country. And he has 50 international patents to his credit that spans VLSI design, digital signal processing, hardware and software co-design, and several other areas. So, he is truly a tech entrepreneur and semiconductor entrepreneur as deep as they come. So, welcome to the show.

(03:15) Parag Naik: Thank you. Thank you, Prakash. Pleasure.

(03:17) Prakash: Yeah, it’s an honor. It’s completely mine.

(03:21) Prakash: Yeah. So let me start with what I talked about in the introduction. All your ventures have had very unique names. How did that come about? Is there a common thread that binds all of that together?

(03:34) Parag: Yeah, actually we wanted to give a local flavor, right? We didn’t want to... so if you look at all these Taiwanese companies, they have, they have this tech and all these names in between. So you wanted to give a very Indian flavor. So that’s the common theme. The first company that we had like you said was Smart Yantra. Right, Yantra is of course machines, smart is Yantra. And then once we got acquired by Genesis Microchip, and then when we served out our period there and then came out to start Saankhya and Vayavya together. Vayavya, there was a very interesting backdrop. Vayavya was a very interesting experiment, I would say. So, most of our ventures have been experiments. We never look at it as, you know, ventures because we are trying to do something crazy. All we said to ourselves was, let’s figure out, you know, it’s like, you know, I am fond of giving cricketing metaphors. You know, when you are out there, you just don’t look at the scorecard, right? You just play through sessions, especially when you’re playing test matches. Play through a session. So just play through a couple of sessions and then we’ll see what happens. With that intent, we started Vayavya way back. There’s a scheme called Beyond Bengaluru right now started with the Karnataka government about, about five years back. In 2006, we started Vayavya in Belgaum or Belagavi as it’s called right now. So, we wanted to give a local flavor to that name of the company that we are forming. And we came up with all kinds of names, Belgaum Tech and then some local mountains and local deities and stuff like that. Flowers around that. And then there was a KSRTC bus passing by. And just then, I think a year before then, you know, KSRTC had broken up into three different divisions within Karnataka. The Northwest division was called Vayavya. Vayavya means northwest in Sanskrit and in Kannada. So, we said that name seems, there’s a nice tone to it and it stuck. So, it’s actually easier to pronounce when it is written in Kannada or Indic languages. In English it is a little bit difficult to get the things right. That was that with Vayavya. In Saankhya also, we wanted to give a local Indian name. Saankhya was not my name. My co-founder Vishwa came up with that name. So Saankhya could actually mean digital in Sanskrit. But at that time, we didn’t know. It turns out that it’s a philosophy. It’s a second chapter of the Bhagavad Gita and there’s a whole lot of, I would say, philosophical underpinnings to that name. Saankhya is actually a philosophy. There is a slight difference between Sankhya and Saankhya. People get that all wrong. Sankhya is number. Saankhya is a philosophy.

(06:20) Prakash: Very interesting.

(06:21) Parag: The only guy who has got it right, you know, and also knew its significance was a Japanese customer. He was a Buddhist guy, so he knew the meaning of Saankhya. Saankhya is actually one way of looking at it loosely is nirvana through knowledge or logic.

(06:40) Prakash: Very cool.

(06:41) Parag: So we started to use that later on.

(06:45) Prakash: So you talked a bit about Belgaum, now Belagavi. You came up, your early life was in that town, which is a small town. And from everything I’ve read about you and listened to what the sessions you have done in the past, you have more of a, I would say a small town or I would say understated mentality and then trying to break through. Is that true?

(07:15) Parag: Actually no. You know, my initial childhood was in Bangalore. So I am quintessentially a Bangalorean. So I stayed in Belgaum only for about 12 years. Most of my life, almost 40 years of it, I’ve been in Bangalore. Malleswaram, so mostly there.

(07:33) Prakash: So when to when were you in Belagavi?

(07:34) Parag: I was in Belgaum between 1981 and 1992. Just 11 years. But then somehow in those formative years, you made so many friends, you stuck with it. So, for some reason, off late especially, you don’t identify yourself with Bangalore. I mean, the way it was when we were growing up to the time it is now, it’s very different. So, my early formative years were in Bangalore. I went to school in Malleswaram. Then our family shifted to Belgaum. My father shifted to Belgaum and that’s how the thing with Belgaum stuck. And because I have got a lot of friends, I somehow over a period of time started to identify with it more than, unfortunately with Bangalore. Stickiness with Bangalore is much lesser. Much lesser than there.

(08:19) Prakash: And has that shaped the kind of risks you took or your philosophy?

(08:24) Parag: So, one of the things is, you know, I think if I recollect right, I went through six schools. I was not, my father was not in the army or you know, in defence forces. So you are constantly yanked out of your comfort zone. So that’s one of the things that shaped me. At those times, you know, you’re always an outsider everywhere. I keep joking that, right? So I was just telling, we were having this conversation in one of our groups the other day when there was a nice article on Rajinikanth on his birthday, I think about a month back. So I said, you know, I’m a half Marathi, half Marathi Kannadiga, living in Bangalore, speaking Kannada, working in semiconductors. So which means you know, I can try a shot at the Tamil film industry, right? He was a conductor, we are in semiconductors, so we are close. So, that way, that kind of defined our personality a bit. Also because you’re an outsider everywhere, in Bangalore and in Belgaum. The North Karnataka region if you look at it, right, it’s pretty unique in some sense. It’s got its own culture, culturally closer to a bit to Maharashtra than to Karnataka this side, right? And, if you look at the depiction of the North Karnataka guys, they’re always caricatures, right? In Kannada movies and in Marathi movies, you end up being both jokers. There are always jokers because the Marathi guys think you don’t speak Marathi, the Kannada guys think you can’t speak Kannada, right? So it’s like.

(09:54) Prakash: You’re good at nothing.

(09:55) Parag: You are good at nothing. And yet, if I look back, that helps you becaus innovation and things happen when you are at a cusp of multiple, diverse opinions or diverse cultures. So we grew up with, because you had Goa border and then there’s a bit of a Goan influence, there’s a little bit of this old Catholic, Portuguese influence on all of it. So you have a bit of a mishmash of everything. That actually did shape to an extent our personality, the ability to connect with people. But also, because you’re yanked out of your comfort zones, now looking back, I can say that was really good because you know, I’m never in a comfort zone, always out of the comfort zone. Every three years you’re out somewhere, right? So you have to go, build a new life so to speak, new friends and stuff like that. So technically, I have friends everywhere. And because of the stint in Bangalore and in Belgaum, I speak multiple languages. Because at six or seven, I was already speaking four. Because my mother is Marathi, my father is Kannadiga, so we spoke Kannada to my father, Marathi to my mother. So we speak both those languages. Of course, Hindi you picked up and English you have to. And then because you’re in Bangalore, you speak a smattering of Tamil and you know, you know a little bit of Telugu here and there, right? So that also gives you a unique advantage because one of the things I’ve seen with people is you open up on their languages, especially in a foreign country, you bond much better.

(11:28) Prakash: So how many languages do you know now?

(11:30) Parag: Actually fluently I speak four. Then well, different dialects by the way, I can speak Marathi in different dialects and Kannada in different dialects depending on the region I am in. I can switch dialects between Belgaum to here. And then I speak a little bit of Tamil. I can manage. I can understand most of it. In fact, once I’d gone to Chennai, I think I’d gone to Woodlands hotel, right? And I ordered stuff in Tamil. The guy responded back to me in Kannada because that accent is very visible, right? So the guy, I think the Woodlands guys had shifted to probably, you know, to Chennai way back, so they know Kannada in our team. And I also understand Dutch a bit because I was in Holland for two years, two and a half years. And then because you know Marathi and you, we had a lot of Gujarati friends, Gujarati is also pretty easy to pick up. Once you know Marathi and Kannada, there’s a lot of other languages you can do if you are tuned to it, right? If you’re tuned to listening to languages and you don’t have to be always right. If you’re a guy who’s very purist, then you won’t speak any other language because you’ll never pick up languages. So coming back to your question, because you’re yanked out of it and also when we went to Belgaum, we lived away from the city. We lived in a farmhouse, right? So, a lot of times because we don’t have TV, this is pre-TV days and just the radio at best you had for watching, for your listening commentary. You had time by yourself. You’ve time with nature. And once you are, you know, in nature, I realized that, and I think everybody should have a stint in nature early on in their childhood because it builds your imagination.

(13:13) Prakash: It shapes you.

(13:14) Parag: It shapes you. Because you have to keep yourself busy. The imagination aspect of it actually helped me later on in my career a lot. And then also because of sports, I was also a very avid cricketer. Yeah, I did and I’ll tell you some of it as we go along. That resilience came in to an extent. Because in our education system, at least during our days, it’s true even now, the only place where you could fail and you can still fail gracefully is in sports. And then you know when you’re playing, playing a team sport that, you know, you can win from losing positions and lose from winning positions. So winning and losing is not part of it. So that builds in that bit of a resilience. Because in the education system, once you fail, you’re done. You’re a duffer. That’s a problem that we have. That, that shaped me, you know...

(14:01) Prakash: So creativity, imagination, and resilience.

(14:05) Parag: Resilience. Curiosity also, right? You’re curious about everything that goes around.

(14:10) Prakash: Yeah, of course. So combine all of that, what made you pick a path on semiconductors versus software and services which India was known and growing up, obviously that would have been a bigger priority for most. Why did you choose a different path?

(14:24) Parag: Well, actually, we have always been a motley crazy bunch, right? I mean, everybody says that about their own batchmates or their own gangs, but we were a bit of, I mean, we were very rebellious to an extent, to a cause or maybe rebel for the sake of rebelling also at times. But when somebody said something is not possible, we’ll exactly show him that it’s not, it is possible, right? Part of it is that, that a bit of a rebellious attitude and defiance. And part also because you love doing it. Right? Once you love what you do and you’re in company of people whom you like, nothing matters actually at the end of it. I mean, of course, you got real world issues like putting food on the table, to four square meals a day. But beyond that point, if these two things are taken care of, right, you will do what you like to do the most. And in your natural state. And once you do that, it just becomes a, it doesn’t become drudgery, right? That’s the reason we chose semiconductors. Also, we’ve always been fascinated with technology, right? Since, since very early on in my career, in fact I worked for the Tejas aircraft in 90’s, between ‘93 and ‘95.

(15:40) Prakash: Yes.

(15:40) Parag: So, there was, there was that exposure to embedded hardware, a lot of exposure to embedded software as well. And I think India was just opening up at that time. And post Smart Yantra, which was our first company, we got acquired by a semiconductor company there. And then we got up close and saw how, how it was operated. It was a well-based company, one of the hottest companies at that time. And then we realized if they can do it, we can do it too. So, that’s the reason, and also the inherent curiosity and the love for the subject.

(16:15) Prakash: Yeah, that was the motivation.

(16:16) Parag: That was the motivation.

(16:17) Prakash: That to prove people wrong that it can be done out of India.

(16:22) Parag: Yeah.

(16:23) Prakash: So you started on that journey and across all companies, you have redefined, you have done software-defined radios, direct-to-mobile broadcast. How did you come about conceptualizing this idea and converting that into a viable business over time?

(16:42) Parag: Actually, some of these are, I mean, most great findings or inventions are accidental, right? They just happen because you’re in there long enough and curious enough and trying to figure out things from first principles. I think that’s something that we have followed always in all our companies, attack problems from first principles. So, if anybody throws jargon, is I think bullshitting. So, once you do that, you will, you will come upon something that is, that is very interesting because most people, I think there’s this thing called Price’s Law, which says that I think, I don’t know, Price or something else, but the gist is only a square root of the employees actually work in a company. Truly, really work. Everybody else is just parasitic stuff. I have a law which extends that, which is saying that, you know, within an industry, only I think the eighth root of the people do any original thinking. Or even, even lesser, right? Everybody else just follows the trend. Somebody says AI, everybody says AI, right? So it’s how well that gets marketed and things like that. So people don’t go back and look at first principles things. Once you start to look at first principles things, you realize that there are a lot of things that can be done better, optimized better or thought through better. And that’s how the first company and, I mean, the first concept that we spoke about, software-defined radio, was born. It was esoteric technology in 2006 because most hardware designers we spoke to, IC designers, says it’s impossible to, you know, do stuff in programmable hardware, building modems just like the way you do, you know, just like the way you do software on custom DSPs. So, that was one of the drivers. The other driver also, because it was a bit difficult and it was maybe seven, eight years beyond, right?

(18:48) Prakash: And people were thinking about what is possible based on what they saw today.

(18:51) Parag: What they saw today. And that’s one of the challenges I’ll tell you in the Indian ecosystem we have, right? That you, you can’t think 10 years out. Nobody, I mean, I keep saying this, you know, most entrepreneurs, I mean, seasoned ones at deep tech entrepreneurs who are looking forward or are generally it’s like they are like a protagonist of a horror flick, right? So you see ghosts in the beginning, nobody believes you. Then they’ll give you electric shocks, right? Only in the end, they’ll say, “Oh yeah,” and then they get the exorcist, right? So that’s the problem. You see ghosts that others don’t see. And explaining those ghosts to these people, to investors is very difficult. And therefore, you need to be a brand by yourself to be able to, you know, convince it, saying that, you know, I want to go build a, you know, I want to build an electric car and make it the best in the world. Well, it’s a 10-year process, right? And people will think you’re crazy. So when we started software-defined radio, we had two challenges, right? One was within the industry saying that it’s an impossible thing to do. And then within the Indian ecosystem, like why, can we even build semiconductors in India, right? This is not the Indian story. We should be selling books or, you know, underwear and banians like they said on the internet. Why are you doing this types? But the real genesis of that idea came in when we were inside, inside Genesis Microchip, where I was working, me and my team were working with the CTO’s office. And communication technologies were just kind of taking off to an extent.

(20:19) Prakash: And which year are you talking about?

(20:20) Parag: This is 2004. 2003, 2004, right? 2004. So, if you look at the communication, you know, history of communications, and history of the communication standards. So, you have a clear distinct era between 1920s when it was invented, 1900s to about 1960s or 1970s, when you had two or three standards. You had AM, FM, and you had TV standards, PAL, NTSC, four or five and mostly military standards. And military used to dominate all the communication technologies, right? Post ‘70s and ‘80s, the shift started with the rise of digital with Moore’s law on the back of the Moore’s law, you could start to build more complicated signal processing architectures on, on transistors, on chips, that you couldn’t do earlier. And then you had between ‘80s and, and about 2005, 2006, when we started Saankhya, you, there were about 15 to 20 standards. Four standards for satellites, terrestrial TV, you had FM, you had, you had 2G, 3G just coming up, 4G was still in the works. Then you had Wi-Fi, 11b, 11a, 11b, all those standards. Maybe about 25, 30 standards. What we realized was as you go on the back of the Moore’s law, right, as the Moore’s law kind of takes you off and you get more and more compute in chips and compute becomes available, more things become programmable. So, we envisaged a scenario where you could have hyper-personal waveforms, which is basically based on what you see in time, what RF signal you see in time and in space, you can change the RF signal. So, to implement that kind of a vision, you needed something that was programmable. And hence software-defined radio. At that time, software-defined radio was a military technology, but we took it to the consumer domain. I mean, it was meant to be very fat, you know, big pieces of hardware costing you a few thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars to make. We brought it down to, you know, about $3 or $4 in the consumer world.

(22:34) Prakash: Wow.

(22:36) Prakash: Like, when you say that, it is uncanny how much the US semiconductor industry owes itself to the US defence.

(22:44) Parag: Absolutely.

(22:44) Prakash: Most of the semiconductor companies started off there.

(22:47) Parag: Absolutely, absolutely. And in fact, you know what, that and one of the challenges that we have in India, right, is not talent, or even companies or even capital is a big challenge. But even now, capital is not a challenge. What you lack in an ecosystem is a, is a godfather customer, I would say. A godfather customer is the right word, right? The customer who sees potential in you, who sees a 70% ready product, pulls it out of you and takes it to 100%. And that’s what the US has been very successful at that. The buyer also has to be equally competent. To be able to pull that technology out of you. And should have that, have that vision to do that. That is seriously lacking in India. Because you’re too, too much quarter-focused, so that becomes a challenge.

(23:38) Prakash: And what could you do to change that status quo?

(23:42) Parag: Ah, good point. I think time also a few successes will help. You know, once Infosys succeeded, there, there was a whole slew of software guys, software services companies that succeeded, right? You need a real big success and then I think it will follow. And I think also, during our times, we had, we were growing up in a fairly socialist, resource-constrained time, right? I mean you had trouble getting two square meals a day and just living your life by was tough. So, I think now people have gone over that financial constraint. They are, they can think and they do what they love and stuff like that, right? Kids these days can do that. So, I think once that generation comes up, they will start to, start to look at long-term solutions.

(24:37) Prakash: Yeah.

(24:37) Parag: And also the incentives, I think in the country are not, not aligned to any long-term thinking. Very little. Everybody needs to see constant progress, right? And in some of these businesses, you can be just lying dormant for years, if not decades, and then suddenly out of nowhere you just take off.

(24:57) Prakash: Yeah. Fair point. Yeah.

(25:00) Prakash: And one part I feel to change the status quo would be innovation.

(25:05) Parag: That’s true.

(25:06) Prakash: And nobody can talk about innovation better than you because you have 50 patents to your name. So what does it take to drive innovation in any organization and how can you push it through your organizations, across a set of diverse teams you have led? What have been your learnings?

(25:24) Parag: My first fundamental learning was, you know, nobody likes to think long-term. Even engineers don’t like to think long-term. There are very few people who are comfortable... I mean, I was fascinated by this English mathematician who proved the Fermat’s theorem in the ‘90s, right? I don’t get his name, I think Arthur something. Okay, whatever. So, he said, the things that he said really stuck with me, right? The difference between a professional mathematician and an amateur mathematician and normal people like us, right, is that a professional mathematician can get stuck on a problem for years, for years without getting mad. Do you have the patience and do you have the persistence to stay focused on a problem for 10 years? I think we don’t have that, right? Once you stay in a problem for 10 years, if you’re of slightly above average intelligence, you will come up with something. That’s what you have to give first that time, the timelines have to change, right? We look at too short time windows for success. That’s one. And for innovation, I think fundamentally, it’s like water, right? You have to have all kinds of ideas strike each other. And for that, you need to be liquid, a little bit liquid in your thought processes. You have to be, in our cases, I found out that you have to be comfortable with yourself and comfortable with the group that you’re talking with, with very little ego, right? You should not feel, you should not feel, you know, egoistic or stupid enough to say, blurt out something which, which you think might be, might sound foolish, but you don’t. That comfort is very important. And, I also think to an extent, you know, the buildings that you stay in, right? If you, they are not architected for innovation, right? It’s most like factory kind of environments. And that is also a challenge, right? If you out, go out on long walks, when we started Saankhya, we actually started Saankhya in Manipal, by the way, not in Bangalore.

(27:32) Prakash: I didn’t know that.

(27:33) Parag: Yeah, it was in Manipal. So we would go out on these long walks in the evenings together. And just discuss stuff, right? And then suddenly out of nowhere, you know, something comes up and then you dig deeper in. That’s how you could do. And then also, you need to have somebody in the group has to have a little bit of imagination. That’s important, right? You have to break free from this and then think literally without any shackles. And a few years out. A few years out. Thinking about how it will go forward, what will look like. One of the key things that we identified then, and that forms the basis of what Open RAN and O-RAN and all of these are today, is the fact that everything has to get programmable.

(28:18) Prakash: And you talked about this specifically in some of the other interviews you have done is the absence of politics and how you have tried your hardest to achieve that.

(28:30) Parag: Well, when there are few people, there’ll always be this politics. You can only minimize it, like, minimize it to a bare minimum. And you have to have people who work each other and who can, can actually think through, right? I mean, we exactly know what the other guy is thinking. So that helps to an extent. It becomes an echo chamber sometimes, so you need to throw in some randomization at times. But by and large, when you’re comfortable with each other, you can, you do that. And then like I say, zero or minimal politics.

(28:57) Prakash: Yeah. So true. Yeah. Very, very true.

(29:00) Parag: And nobody is worried about who gets the credit for it. And that’s the key. If you have the thing of, you want to take credit for everything, you have one of the alpha males in the group, then it becomes a little bit of a challenge.

(29:10) Prakash: Harder. Yeah, very well said. So fast forward, you ran multiple startups. In case of Saankhya, you got acquired by Tejas Networks, which is a Tata Group company. How did the acquisition go? How did it come about? And did it translate your vision of semiconductor industry built out of India into reality or did it give you more responsibilities and opportunities moving forward?

(29:37) Parag: It’s actually both. This whole discussion started during COVID. I can say that now, I mean, we got a call from, we know somebody in the Tata Group and they reached out to us. And then we started to talk about it and we were like genuinely thrilled at that time, right? That somebody with real business knowledge is now really interested in us, because we are, we are written off as hobbyists, right? A bunch of guys doing something. Nobody knows what they are up to. And we had our own near-death experiences and all of that, right? Coming out of it, Tata coming in, that helped. The second thing is also, it opens up, when technology, when you want to build a business, technology is a necessary but not sufficient condition.

(30:20) Prakash: True.

(30:21) Parag: You need good operational efficiency. You need very good capital. So when you have capital, when good capital and operational, patient capital and operational efficiency meets technology, magic happens. Semiconductors especially. All three are very important. We, in fact, when we did Saankhya, one of the biggest learnings for us was, you know was how important operations is. People don’t realize how good an operational company Nvidia is, or how good, how thorough Apple is a better operational company than any other company in the world. On all operational metrics, they beat everybody hollow.

(30:58) Prakash: No wonder a supply chain expert...

(31:00) Parag: A supply chain expert.

(31:01) Prakash: Runs Apple.

(31:02) Parag: Exactly, Apple. I mean, you got to know that. And that’s something we used to discount in the beginning, right? Now we are much more cognizant of it and aware of it, and aware of how supply chain can kill you or make you sometimes, right? Supply chain, geopolitics of the supply chain can change your fortunes overnight. So that came about. And operations, especially for high volume semiconductors is key. I mean, the kind that goes on behind to ensure that we get these millions of phones manufactured every month is just mind-boggling, the kind of precision at which things have to work. So that’s become much more. And so when these three things meet is when you get a world-class company. Not just technology. So we now have a good opportunity to actually build a very powerful telecom OEM out of India, which is probably only the fourth country, right, other than the US and some European countries, China and us. We are the only ones who have the, you know, the heft and the operational capability to actually build something at that scale.

(32:15) Prakash: So you got a bigger vision based on all those three, capital, innovation, and as well as operational capability, all coming together. Very interesting.

(32:26) Parag: We were always capital-starved initially, in 10 years of Saankhya that we ran, though we raised a serious amount of money by Indian standards, we were always starved capital, from a capital perspective, because when you’re building out things in the future, you need a constant flow of money.

(32:43) Prakash: Especially in chips.

(32:44) Parag: Especially in chips, yeah.

(32:45) Prakash: They guzzle a lot of cash.

(32:46) Parag: A lot of cash, yeah.

(32:49) Prakash: So let me take a break from this conversation and take a bunch of questions on speed round. It’ll give you or our viewers a view of what Parag outside of work is. So, let me ask you the first one. If you could swap lives with an unconventional inventor, you can take real or fictional, for one week, who would you rather be and what would you build?

(33:19) Parag: I think it would be J.C. Bose or Brahmagupta was one of our, sorry, Bhaskara was who actually is actually the father of calculus. The work that he did actually ended up in what we call calculus today. Bose because he was a polymath and I think from being a botanist to the actual inventor of wireless. I mean, he’s the one who invented wireless, not Marconi. So Marconi gets the credit for it. And they did more or less parallelly. He beat Marconi much before that. What I would build? There are a lot of things. One would be a better lithography machine. I mean, that’s one of my, it’s an engineer’s dream, right? So I mean if you’re a true guy, you know now the kind of complexity that goes into building a lithography machine. And then of course, there are a lot of things that we do, you know, for our own internal smaller stuff for building 6G and stuff like that. Lithography, this, and probably I would, I would like to prove, in Bhaskara’s model that AGI is not possible with the way with LLMs. Prove it not anecdotally, but prove it really for a fact that it’s not.

(34:33) Prakash: Factually.

(34:34) Parag: Factually, yeah.

(34:36) Prakash: So what’s the most foolishly brave gamble you have ever taken inside or outside work?

(34:43) Parag: Oh, lots of them. But the most foolish one probably would be, I think, we had almost a, we had two near-death experiences in Saankhya, right? We almost came close to shutting down once in 2011, I think we ran out of money. And Intel Capital came in. And then in 2016, I think, 2015 or 2016, we had run up debts, we had run out of money. And we had no money to pay anywhere. So I brought in, I was I think 46 at that time. And we had exhausted all our reserves, whatever little reserves we had, right, as you can imagine. And I brought in about, without telling my family, about 60 - 70 to 75% of my last stashed away savings into Saankhya. That was the most foolish thing looking back I did. If it had gone the other way around, you know, it would have put my family at risk.

(35:44) Prakash: Brutal life of a founder.

(35:45) Parag: Yeah, yeah. It sounds very romantic. The reality is not.

(35:50) Prakash: Very true. What’s your favorite line from movies? I know you like movies.

(35:54) Parag: Yeah, one I have in the back of my office every time, which is, you know, it’s from Gabbar Singh, Sholay is my favorite movie. “Jo dar gaya, samjho mar gaya.” So that line, the guy who’s scared is gone, right? So that’s the adage that we live with and I keep telling people, shit happens, so...

(36:14) Prakash: That’s a favorite one?

(36:15) Parag: Favorite one.

(36:16) Prakash: True. So what’s one piece of bad advice you hear all the time as a founder that you secretly love to break?

(36:23) Parag: It’s not a secret, I’m very open about it. I think, no secrets with me. So, when I have been often told, you know, do sensitivity analysis on your business plan initially. I think that’s the stupidest advice that you can get. I mean, we’re just trying out stuff and you want, you want to build things and then go in and somebody comes and says, that Excel sheet, that number, change it and see what happens. That’s one. And anyway, I have very scant respect for the Indian VC ecosystem. I’m very open about it and they know about it as well, right? The kind of people they back, the kind of toxic leadership that you see, right? Scale at any cost. They don’t see some of these things you know. You don’t want to be a hamster on a wheel, right? You have to, like I said in earlier discussions, some of the stuff, at least that we do in our part of the deep tech business is a 15-year, 10, 15-year journey. We have very few people who have that kind of a horizon. That’s a challenge.

(37:20) Prakash: Fair point. Would you rather spend a day tinkering in a garage with no internet or giving a TED talk on global semiconductor strategy and why?

(37:29) Parag: I wouldn’t take that bet. You know, it’s why either or? I could do both depending on my mood. So sometimes you want to do that, sometimes... Very early on, right, this is one of the challenges you have as a technical guy. If you’re a pure technical guy, and you get out of your work, right? And you don’t do, you don’t sit in front of your machine, you don’t code, you don’t do a layout, you don’t come up with a new design, you think you’re not, that’s not work. So if you’re going out and meeting people, you’re trying to do policy changes, you think initially that took a long time for me to get over that hangover, that that is also work, that mindset that that is work. So, both are important. Both are equally important. It is not either or. And what I realized also is that a great scientist or a great engineer is also a very good salesman, though he might not admit it. You have to be able to sell your idea. And as an entrepreneur, I, it stuck me one day that we are actually far better sales guys than most people give us credit for and we ourselves give credit for, right? Because you’re selling constantly. You’re selling to investors, you’re selling to family, you’re selling to employees, you’re selling to everybody that you get. Without subconsciously knowing that we are actually selling it.

(38:40) Prakash: Which college day memory from Belgaum did you revisit the most when faced with a major technical challenge?

(38:49) Parag: Two I think. One is, you know, in college, we had evolved because we were in a private engineering college, we were not as competitive. Right? We collaborated much more. We had a group of about eight or nine people that would study, we had evolved this method of studying where, you know, each one reads something and explains to the rest of the group on what he’s understood. That actually is Shannon’s information theory. Which is basically when you have independent sources of information, you can add them up. So in a group, however smart one guy is, each one has a very different perspective.

(39:33) Prakash: Agree.

(39:34) Parag: So, it might look very different. And that’s why if you have people from diverse cultures, it’s easier, and that helps. That people think very differently. And if you give weightage to each one of them, the sum total of all of that is bigger than the parts, right? The whole is bigger than the sum part. So faced with any challenges, we generally have a collaborative thing. We make everybody talk about the issue and, you know, come up with the best way forward. A lot of times, the guy on the front, generally what happens is a problem is, you know, somebody in the CEO or somebody takes a call and it’s, it’s not true, especially in our businesses, the guy on the front, he knows the...

(40:14) Prakash: He knows the best.

(40:15) Parag: He knows the best. All he needs is, he needs his guidance, right? The way we have always operated in Saankhya is, you know, we are there to help you solve the problem. Right? We’ll help you with the problem, but we can’t, we won’t keep asking you, I won’t ask you, it won’t help me that, you know, I have a standup every half an hour. Typically, most program managers will come and say, “Okay, something is not working, there’s a fire.” Instead of checking a status one day, let’s check it half a day. Checking every 30 minutes doesn’t help. Right? It will only add more overheads. Asking him, asking that person, him or her, to see what we could do and giving them that cover fire, probably is very, very important is what we have learned when we really faced with technical hurdles. The second one I, I’ll give you a cricketing metaphor. I remember we, like I said, I was one of, you know, we had all, growing up, you always had this dream, right, of in India of being a cricketer, right? So that’s that always stays. So, we had this, I think it was one of those finals, I don’t remember which one it was. We were playing inter-collegiate or whatever. And we went into bat first, we were, it was a 40-over match, I think, I don’t know, 40 or 50-over match. And we got all out for 60.

(41:27) Prakash: Wow.

(41:28) Parag: 60. Because the team was too good. And the, the, the batting second, the opposition was 15 for no loss in, after three overs. And then I came in to bowl. And they were all out for 32.

(41:42) Prakash: Wow.

(41:42) Parag: So that was the, that’s why I said, you don’t know. I mean, until, you don’t celebrate or don’t feel bad until the last thing is done, right? You never know when it is there.

(41:51) Prakash: And what were your figures?

(41:53) Parag: I think I took some seven wickets in four overs or something. That day was, you know, like a... some days just happen, right? You just get into a flow. So those two memories are very strong. So, I always remember that. You can fail from winning positions, and you can win from losing positions. So that is something that cricket has taught me, if not anything else.

(42:13) Prakash: Brilliant.

(42:16) Prakash: So last question. What is the most underrated technology in chips or deep tech according to you?

(42:21) Parag: Well, actually there are many. But the three most underrated that I tell you that I feel they are underrated. One is the LMS algorithm that runs practically, most people wouldn’t know it. Most people who work in AI also don’t know it. That’s why the magic of the LLMs come in or the CNNs come in. It’s an algorithm designed over a weekend by, I think at Stanford by Widrow or one of the guys, Hoff or Widrow. Those two guys built this algorithm and that is the backbone of the LLM revolution that you see today.

(42:57) Prakash: And what is the algorigthm?

(42:58) Parag: It’s called the least mean square. So it’s an optimization algorithm that you find a local optimum or a minimum by just iteratively descending without spending a lot of compute power. Earlier it’s an approximation of the least squares technology where you know, you need to do matrix inversion, so that is very, very computationally expensive.

(43:23) Prakash: Right.

(43:23) Parag: It’s one. The other one, I like talking about abstractions, right? The, that we did, probably we should talk about that as well is, in the EDA, there’s an algorithm called simulated annealing which forms the backdrop for all chip layout. You couldn’t build these two-nanometer billion transistor chipsets or 10 billion transistor chipsets without that algorithm. I think it was invented in the ‘70s at IBM. And the third one from a circuit topology perspective is bandgap reference. I don’t know if you know that. Bandgap is, most digital engineers don’t know about it. It’s I think it’s poetry in circuits. Right? It’s a way of getting a stable voltage reference in an analog circuit irrespective of what corners of PVT that you have. It doesn’t vary over temperature, process, or voltage. So those three are my favorite, understated, most people don’t even know about it.

(44:18) Prakash: From the way you speak about topics, I’m sure you are a big reader. Any recommendations on books or things people should read?

(44:29) Parag: I read a lot. My two of my favorite ones are, I think one of the books that I changed my perspective is Fooled by Randomness. I think it’s a book by Nicholas Taleb.

(44:42) Prakash: Taleb.

(44:42) Parag: Taleb. And if I had that book in growing up in college, probably I would have become an economist, so I hated economics so at that time. The way he brings about it. That and one of the other books that I’ve actually from, you know, again, from an AI perspective, I recommend most people to read is The Emperor’s New Mind by Penrose. He debunks this thing that intelligence comes through LLMs and neural networks.

(45:13) Prakash: Emperor’s New Mind.

(45:14) Parag: I’ve not read that.

(45:14) Parag: The Emperor’s New Mind, it’s a big, fat book. It’s a difficult book. He’s the only guy who explains Turing machines and Gödel’s hypothesis, which every computer science guy should know. I think all these days colleges talk about, you know, we have 10 years’ experience in AI and all of that, right? They don’t teach them Turing machines properly and Gödel’s theorem properly. If they, those two things somebody knows, we’ll just hire him. If somebody knows about, in this generation, you even knows about Gödel properly, we’ll hire him because, you know, he’s done a lot of reading, right? Most people don’t know Kurt Gödel. Then from a literature perspective, there are a lot, lots and lots. A lot of stuff in Indian literature, but the one that stands out was which is there also in my email signature constantly, not often, but I use it often, is The Little Prince. It’s a book written by Antoine de Saint-Exupery... French author, I don’t know, I don’t get this French names right. It’s supposed to be for children, it’s a book for kids, for children. It is not at all for children. It is layered and layered and layered. Each time you read it, you get a very different perspective, right?

(46:26) Prakash: Beautiful.

(46:26) Parag: Yeah.

(46:28) Prakash: All three are such diverse topics.

(46:31) Parag: Yeah, fantastic. Thank you.

(46:34) Prakash: So to get back to the conversation we were having, to quote you in some of the past conversations you’ve said, ecosystem trumps technology.

(46:43) Parag: Correct.

(46:44) Prakash: So from an ecosystem context, India ecosystem context, where do you believe are the major opportunities? What are the biggest hurdles that entrepreneurs face? And what’s been your advice to people who are starting off in this chip or deep tech space?

(46:59) Parag: the hurdles have been, I think, I mean, see, there’s far more hurdles than there are tailwinds in India, right? At least things are changing a little bit right now. See, we, we lack patient capital. We never had any patient capital. We have, unfortunately, you don’t have these one-look investors.

(47:24) Prakash: What do you mean by that?

(47:26) Parag: This one-look investor is, I’ve been fortunate to have met two or three of these guys. Unfortunately, mostly in the US. And maybe in India we don’t get to access them because they’re too big and the gatekeepers don’t allow it. There’s one of our investors from Sinclair, David Smith. He probably is a billionaire himself. Potentially a billionaire and a media mogul in the US. And we had, when we were in doldrums and we were trying to raise our money when during our second near-death experience, I go talk to him. He’s never met a guy with my accent, right? He doesn’t understand my accent. He just looks me up in 15 minutes and says, “I’m going to work with this guy.” So, they have this gut feel that gets evolved over a period of time. People who are operational, right, who have built companies, who have seen people, who have seen life, they will see that. They will see through, cut through all the noise and then then see through it.

(48:26) Prakash: “Can I bet on you?”

(48:27) Parag: “Can I bet on you?” right? Can I bet on you? So, that’s what you do, right? As VCs fundamentally, I believe, this is maybe they have a different process, but I believe they take an already irrational decision to work with some guy or not. And then the paperwork comes in to prove that, you know, okay, I want to work with this guy, right? So, at least if you have the humility to acknowledge that, things will be different. In India, unfortunately, when most of the VCs don’t have operational experience, they’re just kids who come out of IITs or fancy MBA schools and then they’ll come and they’re very good at analysis, they’re analytical morons. They’ll keep slicing and dicing and all of that, right? That doesn’t help. You have to be able to connect with the guy. Maybe there are some guys in India as well, we have not, at least I have not met them during our initial journey and I stopped going to them after 2010. They said there’s no point in talking to them.

(49:18) Prakash: Fair point. So when you look at that, that kind of environment, right? You’ve been an advisor to several of the startups or people who are starting off in their journey, what do you believe are the things that they must absolutely get right?

(49:35) Parag: I don’t think, Prakash, there’s such thing as absolutely right. I think a startup is like a movie. You’re as good as your last one.

(49:41) Prakash: You have a hit, doesn’t...

(49:43) Parag: Yeah, it’s like a game of cricket or any other basketball game. Just because you won one game, doesn’t mean you can win the other. Each story is unique, right? Each story is unique. And to me, fundamentally, I think it’s not about the idea. The idea will come along. If the team is there together... most of the times, you know, team, the startups fail because the team splinters, right? The founders don’t get along. So if you have people who work together and if you have an idea and you’re passionate about it, you’ll figure out a way. You just have to see, of course, it has to make a little bit of business sense also, right? You can’t be doing hara-kiri. You can’t just do, commit suicide. But beyond that, if they are willing to change the direction, I think that’s what you should look at. You should just aim at a certain direction. It’s just like the LMS algorithm, right? You don’t know, you go approximately around and just figure your way around as you go along. And be malleable to any changes that come along. Those teams probably succeed far more than people who are rigid and who are, you know, over, oversold on an idea.

(50:43) Prakash: Understand. And as they do that, one of the aspects you talked about in our session as well as in the past sessions is need for collaboration rather than competition.

(50:52) Parag: Absolutely.

(50:53) Prakash: So what could our policy makers, academic institutions, startup founders, or even large corporates combine, collaboratively do to really further the cause of semiconductor and deep tech ecosystem in India?

(51:07) Parag: Oh, a lot. Everybody is working in silos. Let me start off with the corporate honchos, right? They are too buried in their excel sheets right now, right? They are all about operational efficiency. Must, that’s one leg of the stool. Then the entrepreneurs are somebody who can make things work. You got the academicians who can actually think, they should be thinking 15 years beyond. Right? 15, 20 years beyond what, what’s the next thing coming in? And the policy makers, have a very important role. I think the policy makers is probably the most important, it’s the role of a catalyst. You know, you have to come up with policies which spawn entrepreneurship, which help you with removing hurdles, unnecessary hurdles. We are extremely bureaucratically tangled country in some sense, right? Simple things like, you know, people at the end of it. Show me incentives and I’ll show you the outcome is somebody who said that.

(52:08) Prakash: Charlie Munger, I think.

(52:09) Parag: Munger, okay. That’s the thing, right? The right incentives have to be created. If you want an outcome, don’t chase the outcome, chase the incentives. Change the incentives and the outcome will change. Right? Like, for example, there’s this constant refrain that corporates don’t do R&D in India, right? Okay, then one of the things that they have scared of is write-offs. I have been saying for quite some time, let’s come up with a write-off policy which is very different from the rest of the world. And they say, “Oh, it’s never been implemented.” That’s the problem. They have the mindset of a lawyer, not an innovator. They want precedents for everything. That change is happening gradually, very slowly, but it will happen over a period of time. Hopefully. And when all these legs come together, and you rightly identified all the four legs of the stool, I think we will be unstoppable.

(52:58) Prakash: And are there any early signs or policies or initiatives you feel are stepping in the right direction?

(53:05) Parag: Baby steps. There’s more optics, but I think we are already taking baby steps towards the PLI, the DLI schemes at least for, for semiconductors, right? And there is generally awareness about semiconductors. That is a big thing, right? A very big thing. So, we raised those days at that dollar value in 2011, I think we raised about 10 million dollars or something like that, right? And nobody even knew about it. And today the minister tweets if somebody raises money, which is very good. And the other day at IMC, they hand-picked four or five startups and pitched them in the stage in front of the PM. That’s big, right? So at least they get visibility. That helps. There is intent. At least there is intent now. They will stutter around and we’ll figure out a way to, the only advice to them is they should listen to the guys who have been on the ground, not get some foreign transplants who don’t understand the realities of building a company in India.

(54:05) Prakash: So people like you can definitely contribute.

(54:06) Parag: Exactly. We are actually, we just give our inputs, you know, on a regular basis on what should be done.

(54:15) Prakash: Very cool. Yeah. I’m sure it’ll be extremely valuable for the policy makers. So, switching gears to your personal philosophy. A lot of it audience would have already heard so far. You’ve talked about multi-dimensional nature of success. You have to be brave and foolish simultaneously to succeed as an example, right? So how much of that has shaped your journey? What do you believe true success or true failure is as you have seen through several downturns and upturns in your startup life?

(54:48) Parag: I think for me, see as Saankhya, there’s a commercial aspect and there’s an ecosystem aspect. Commercially, I would say we were like, okay, so-so success, right? We didn’t become a billion-dollar company and sell it off. But I had gone to IIT Bombay and then in one of those sessions, the professors there said, “You know, we look up to you guys to do.” And I said that, that’s good, right? That’s success, right? For me, the best recognition you can get is peer recognition. If your competitor or your peer recognizes you, you’re done. And he puts you on his radar, that’s the best, and especially if the competitor is a bigger one, a well-known one. And he considers you as a worthy enough player, that’s a big indicator of success. I think I’ve also been, as you get into this startup, right, and you start to build companies, I think it’s a bit of, bit more of a spiritual journey more than anything else. People don’t realize that.

(55:46) Prakash: Why?

(55:47) Parag: You know, you discover yourself, right? Spirituality is, I mean, people think spirituality is about sitting there and you know, meditating. That’s part of it, right? That’s the mechanics of it. But the fact that to be spiritual, you fundamentally have to be very brave. You have to have the courage to accept the way things are, right? And things within your control. And things not in your control. And then, one of the reasons, you know, once you take diksha in the Indian monk system is you change your name is because you want to cut your past out, right? So here you discover that, that’s because you don’t want to be attached to that past. You discover facets of your personality that you never thought were there. At least for me, you know, there are a lot of aspects that I have discovered of myself and of people around me that you never thought we had, right? And that’s where the sense of leadership comes in, right? When, you know, how do you behave when you’re in trouble, right? Do you just jump and run away and throw everybody under the bus and just go off? Or also, equally important is how do you behave when you have power? For me fundamentally is...

(56:56) Prakash: It’s a mirror to your character.

(56:57) Parag: The best way to test a man’s character or a woman’s character is to give them power. Your best and your worst both get amplified.

(57:07) Prakash: It’s the position. It’s not the person.

(57:08) Parag: It’s not the person. So in that sense, you could be successful, you know, at anything. If you are at peace with yourself, you can be successful at doing anything. In fact, I remember Ralph Waldo Emerson has written an essay on success, where he says what it means to be successful. I urge your viewers to go and watch that. It’s a small essay.

(57:30) Prakash: Yes. I think I’ve read that.

(57:31) Parag: You have read that, right? You planting a tree, planting a plant, flower, that itself is success. Raising a good child is a success. I mean, we unfortunately reduce it to one number, right? Oh, he’s a billionaire. I mean, and the media tends to...

(57:47) Prakash: Those kind of...

(57:48) Parag: Those kind of things, right? There are people who are successful without...

(57:53) Prakash: any of that.

(57:54) Parag: Yeah.

(57:56) Prakash: So how much in that journey has mentorship helped you and how have you been able to balance ambition and humility, right? You come across as such a down-to-earth person for everything that you have achieved.

(58:07) Parag: I don’t think I’m down to... I have most people think I’m very arrogant, but anyway, that’s a different. I’m not to think I am humble enough. Yeah, I’m outspoken. Let me put it that way, right?

(58:18) Prakash: That’s slightly different.

(58:19) Parag: A bit outspoken. I would say, yeah. Mentorship, you know, we haven’t, I have not had mentors directly. In fact, we have had more good or bad, I don’t know. We never had one mentor that we looked up to. We had a motley peer relationships. A lot of peer relationships. One of the things in Saankhya was, we are all equal, but there is a first among equals for some external facing thing. But by and large, it’s the peer mentorship that helped, right? But then there are some, at some points in time, some people have, you know, told us things that we probably held the mirror back to us on when we were probably going wrong. One of the things was, I think we had an advisory board that we had set up. And one of our advisors told us that you guys are not media savvy. You’re not going to the media often enough. And we said, I cringe at going to, you know. Six years ago, seven years ago, none of us would have even come into this podcast, right? But then we realized that, you know, these stories need to be told and at the end of the day narratives are important more than numbers.

(59:21) Prakash: Yeah. Yeah.

(59:22) Parag: Narratives are very, very... people like to listen to stories, right?

(59:26) Prakash: And our story is as good as anybody else’s, right? And it’s been interesting, so.

(59:30) Prakash: It’s very interesting. And yeah, human beings relate to stories much more than data.

(59:34) Parag: Much more than data, yeah. So even being able to tell a story itself is success, right? And now I have a lot of regard for the guys who write scripts, right, in the movies. That’s really creative, right? In fact, in Saankhya, very early on, we had this idea of actually putting in a camera there. But then that would have violated privacy concerns, right? But the kind of, we are all colorful people, all of us, right? And we use very colorful language at times. So, which is now passing off as, you know, very...we would have had a very interesting web series called “Startup” or something that would have come out of that. Maybe one day we will do that.

(1:00:11) Prakash: Adam Grant recently, I was reading his post, he said colorful language is a mark of authenticity.

(1:00:17) Parag: Yeah, yeah. It’s a bit of a catharsis, right? You use all this and, and this is true, especially in our region, right? In the Belgaum, the South Maharashtra, North Karnataka belt, right? People tend to be very rough when especially when you’re with friends. They use very colorful language very often. The amount of color you use dictates how close you are with the person.

(1:00:42) Prakash: When you meet college friends...

(1:00:42) Parag: Oh yeah, not just any... it’s like that, right?

(1:00:48) Prakash: All right. So switching gears. And you briefly talked about this on computer science. And you mentioned computer science is increasing the level of abstraction. So, every five, six years, the productivity for the developer doubles and Moore’s law has doubled the computing in 12, 18 months. Obviously, it is happening faster with GPUs now, one would argue. So, what do you believe are the most interesting opportunities with keeping that premise in the future that India could really take advantage of?

(1:01:21) Parag: Right. So, I think not computer science or maybe computing paradigm, computational paradigm, rests on two fundamental principles. It was very complex, but you can distil it to two. One is increasing the level of abstraction, and the second one is called late binding. You know, you bind something as late as possible, which is like, again a cricketing metaphor, you’re playing on an English wicket, damp English wicket, you don’t cut across and go across the line, right? You wait and watch the ball till the last. Binding is something like that. So, binding is you are committing certain decisions very early on. You should try and commit the decisions as late as possible. Because then you get more flexibility. It’s like you’re getting more choices. So, hardware architectures is the least form of binding in the sense that I’m committing or baking an algorithm into the chip. I can’t change it once it’s taped out, right? A programmable thing is one step better than that. Right? Where I’m able to change it very late. One step further is the concept of hypervisors. The whole cloud paradigm rests on the concept of late binding. You have a hypervisor. You don’t bind an operating system to a machine. You have a hypervisor in between that you can run multiple operating systems. Then you have containers that can actually run. How does it help? You can use compute resources far more efficiently. That’s why large farms of servers in the whole thing in the data center is all about how do I reduce power, how do I reduce the amount of equipment, how do I reduce the amount of resources I use to build out a particular workload. A workload could be a GPU workload or an AI workload or, you know, whatever. So those two principles are really principles fundamental from a semiconductor perspective. So, what does that translate to? It translates to building better custom programmable architectures. Like for example, in Saankhya, we set out to build programmable custom architectures that bind late for modems, which is a very difficult problem to solve. You could look at other workloads to do that. You could build frameworks, software frameworks, which allow you to bind late, which means today, one of the reasons why it was difficult to displace Intel and now difficult to displace Nvidia is because of the amount of software that’s being already built on it, right?

(1:03:48) Prakash: CUDA being an example.

(1:03:49) Parag: CUDA being an example. I mean, it’s more a software company than a hardware company, right? CUDA is the moat, real moat that comes in.

(1:03:54) Prakash: Agree.

(1:03:54) Parag: Yeah. So, do you know incidentally, it was never built for, the GPUs were never built for AI.

(1:04:03) Prakash: That is true.

(1:04:04) Parag: One of those OpenAI guys, accidentally said, “Okay,” he didn’t know how to program RTL, right, in an FPGA. He said, “Oh, let me try this stuff.” And 2011 or 2012, he just tried it and it worked. And that’s how, so that’s why I said, all these things happen accidentally. Some of these, if you’re long enough, you get accidentally. So, these two paradigms are key. Then of course, that’s the digital architecture, right? I’m talking about the digital architecture. In the analog world too, and in the RF world as well, there are a slew of architectures around this concept. There are in RF, there’s this concept called direct sampling receivers, which is basically you just take in the RF signal and then try to do everything digitally. Very complex to do. Those are the things that are, that are big opportunities. But by and large, semiconductors, if you can get something at a lower price than your existing competitor and a slightly better performance, game on. It’s all about execution at the end of it. These are technologies but you have to be able to execute, right? Even if you have a good piece of an idea or whatever, to get to, you know, to execution, to build a business out of it is itself a big challenge. Don’t discount that part. Sometimes we just see the tip of the iceberg in terms of, you know, the idea.

(1:05:26) Prakash: True.

(1:05:26) Parag: What goes beneath is...

(1:05:27) Prakash: So much more.

(1:05:28) Parag: What differentiates people is execution.

(1:05:31) Prakash: Yeah. So with those two premise elements that you talked about, abstraction of computing and as well as taking the choices to the last, how, does it present some unique opportunities for India? Or is it the same for any market?

(1:05:53) Parag: It’s the same for any market. See, what distinguishes us, I think what opportunities that we have is today if you look at it, there’s a high-end Nvidia and there’s a data center market where the US really is up there, right? But the majority of the things that work, your phones, your feature phones, your routers, whatever else is all Taiwan and China.

(1:06:23) Prakash: China. Yeah, including robotics, most of everything, right?

(1:06:25) Parag: So if you view it from a finance perspective, they are able to sell these chips at $2, $2.5, one of the challenges we had in Saankhya was that, right? We had design wins, but we couldn’t meet the price because the supply chain thing that we had not cracked, right? I remember this with Genesis Microchip. Genesis Microchip at one point in time had 85% of the market share for LCD TVs around the world. Then there comes along a company that then becomes MediaTek later on, that displaces them on just out-executing Genesis and getting the prices down faster than Genesis could. The reason is, for American and Western European countries, there’s a minimum margin that they need to be able to sustain a business. Right? So the minimum ASP they would need to have to earn a business. Our barriers are very low. The only other company that can take on Taiwan or China is India. So that is a huge opportunity for us to clean up. And that’s a technique I think China has used even in sports. I said earlier, right? They in the late ‘80s and ‘90s, they were just like India, few, one or two brilliant individuals who succeed inside of the system.

(1:07:44) Prakash: This was the conversation we were having before we started recording.

(1:07:46) Parag: Precisely. So, they went about looking at the lower rung of the sports. Don’t go and pick up the 100 meters dash first, right? So there are a lot of other things that you can pick up, increase your tally. Once you increase the tally and then people start to get confidence, then you can go at the 100-meter dash. Agree. So that’s how China has come up, right? It’s not...

(1:08:05) Prakash: Little by little.

(1:08:05) Parag: Little by little, little by little over a period of time. And you give yourselves about 15, 20 years. Yeah. You will get one inflection point. A geopolitical inflection point is guaranteed. Yeah. In a 15, 20 years. But the question is, can you last that long?

(1:08:19) Prakash: Right?

(1:08:20) Parag: Yeah. That’s the challenge. So everybody wants to become a billionaire in three years, right? So that’s the problem. Not everybody can. That doesn’t mean you are not successful.

(1:08:31) Prakash: That’s true. Your definition of success needs to change.

(1:08:33) Parag: Needs to change. Yeah.

(1:08:35) Prakash: So that brings me to the last question I ask all my guests. India’s venture into deep tech and semiconductor is not only about domestic growth. It’s about our position in the global technology landscape. So, if you fast forward 15, 20 years, you talked about it being a long game. What is your vision for India’s position in that map and what needs to happen today to make that a reality?

(1:08:58) Parag: Yeah, there are four aspects to it. See, one is the OEMs, we have very few OEMs in India firstly, right? Building electronics products to pull out. Then there’s the fabless companies that supply to these OEMs. Then there’s the manufacturing ecosystem. Manufacturing ecosystem is very nascent in India, right? So at least in the last couple of years, there have been steps towards at least creating that expertise. That will, to me, it will take much longer. The design and the OEMs are something that can, that can actually, in the next five or 10 years, you can get a very big one coming out of India potentially. Can come out of India. That’s where our strength is. And that’s where most of the value is.

(1:09:40) Prakash: Right.

(1:09:40) Parag: Design has got the most amount of value. Design is the maximum value. But manufacturing is important for strategic reasons. So, at the manufacturing thing, even if we get two, three, 5%, 8% of the world’s supply chain, today we are non-existent in the global supply chain. At least we get to 5% or 8%, it’s victory for us, big one. Design, we get up to 10, 15%. I think design and OEM, that’s good. 10, 15, 20%. See, you can’t indigenize everything. You can’t be Atmanirbhar for everything, right? But you have to be part of the global supply chain. And unless you have certain critical components with yourself, we have dreams of being a superpower, you can’t do that. You have to control certain parts of the critical parts of the supply chain. And if you do that, that’s good enough. But we won’t be able to indigenize everything. And on the machine tooling part, which is the lithography and, you know, the..

(1:10:39) Prakash: That’s the fourth element.

(1:10:40) Parag: Fifth element rather, there’s nothing yet in India. There are not, there are not even lithography, you know, courses in India, I think, as far as I know.

(1:10:49) Prakash: So what needs to happen today to make these successes a reality or these areas for us to...

(1:10:54) Parag: See, first is there are a lot of these applied physics labs everywhere. There are applied physics labs and applied math labs. They need leadership to be able to go build these products. IISc has an applied physics lab. I’m sure a lot of IITs have that. You have an Indian Statistical Institute. You think there are the smartest people on earth. One of the smartest, okay, not the smartest, but one of the smartest. So that environment needs to be there, right? The environment that it’s okay to take a long-term bet. It’s okay to play around. And then the leadership that, see, this is one of the challenges that is there in typical corporate leadership, right? They cannot handle mavericks. So the people who are innovative are a bit of a maverick. They have to handle them with care. They have a very different way of looking at life. And that’s why they bring value to the table. They will not fit in your regular pigeon-holed...

(1:11:45) Prakash: Because you won’t fall in line.

(1:11:46) Parag: You won’t fall in line. So the way to handle them is what is the challenge that we have in India, I think. We are not able to nurture that kind of thought process. And then, once you beat them down and then they say, and then that’s the incentive we were talking about, right? They have no incentive to go and innovate. They would rather sit and listen to the boss and do what he says. So that part is something that we can nurture. And then therefore, these things in lithography, even if we supply engineers, that’s I think is big. I think there are a lot of guys who work for ASML from India. There are a few at least I know personally. So that happens, then the expertise starts to build up.

(1:12:26) Prakash: Starts to build. Fantastic. So, we come through your entire journey and heard several of your perspectives. I’m sure the audience will take a lot from it. Is there anything that you wanted to cover that we didn’t cover?

(1:12:42) Parag: I think we have practically covered everything. And I think like, the last part I would just want to say is, somebody had asked me, is this the right time to start? I think any time is right. Just do it, right? And you do it because the last part, I would like to say is, about this character called Dev Anand. You know film stars we generally associate with not very high intellect, right? So I had watched one of his interviews, the last interview, I think in 2002 or 3, I just saw, my wife was watching it. And this guy comes, Simi Garewal, he was in that Simi Garewal show, I think. So she asks him, “Dev saab, you have been making movies for so many years. Your last hit was in 1976.” And you still making movies. He smiled, he was I think 75 or something. He says, “I make movies for myself, not for you. You want to watch it, fine.” You don’t know how to watch it, that’s fine too. And the second thing he said, something in the same interview, then I have a huge respect for that guy after that. He says, “Living is primary, livelihood is secondary.” The problem is we are chasing livelihoods there, especially the middle class in India, right? We are sitting on our fat ivory towers and, you know, letting life slip by. So livelihood is secondary. Living is primary. So that’s the Dev Anand line I would take. And that’s also the reason why I like this, this book that you put here, right? S.D. Burman.

(1:14:17) Prakash: Yes.

(1:14:18) Parag: He is my favorite. And because Dev Anand recognized, most of his Dev Anand’s movies, S.D. Burman, Dada Burman is, you know, given the music. So and we can see the...

(1:14:29) Prakash: Yeah, for the audience, there is a book, S.D. Burman book that Parag happened to see when we started the recording.

(1:14:36) Parag: Yeah, and that’s one of my favorite books as well. So I keep reading it.

(1:14:41) Prakash: Fantastic.

(1:14:42) Parag: His biography.

(1:14:43) Prakash: Yeah.

(1:14:44) Parag: And because in that, I think I, in that book, there is, Shiv-Hari, you know, Shiv-Hari, Hariprasad Chaurasia and...

(1:14:54) Prakash: Hariprasad...

(1:14:55) Parag: Shivkumar Sharma, right? Pandit Shivkumar Sharma. So he says about Dada Burman, right? Because they were understudies with him. So you can imagine his level. So he always used them as his musicians, right? Either flute or tabla or, you know, or the santoor. He says, while the Indian classical, shastriya sangeet guys look down upon Bollywood music, imagine you’re given a scenario, you’re given a scene, and you have to create a song, you have so many constraints and you have to come up, and that’s creativity at its best. So you have to come up with a situation, given a situation, given the director’s thing, you have to come up with a song that actually becomes a hit. It’s really, I mean, hats off to those guys.

(1:15:43) Prakash: True.

(1:15:44) Parag: That’s true creativity.

(1:15:45) Prakash: Yeah, 100% agree. What a fantastic conversation. Thank you very much.

(1:15:50) Parag: Pleasure, pleasure being with you.

(1:15:52) Prakash: Yeah, nice talking to you as well. And wish you all the very best in your future journey of empowering India on the semiconductor and deep tech journey. So, for the audience, thank you for listening, thank you for watching. Please follow our show, give us feedback on what else you would like to listen, what kind of people, what kind of innovators, what kind of conversations you would like to have in the future. Thank you very much.

(1:16:18) (Outro Music)

Episode Summary:

What will it take for India to become a true global power in the semiconductor industry? In this episode of Chai & Chips, I sat down with GS Madhusudan, a veteran technologist and the co-founder & CEO of InCore Semiconductors, one of India’s pioneering RISC-V processor IP companies. Madhusudan provides a masterclass on the Indian semiconductor landscape, breaking down the complex ecosystem into distinct verticals—from design and product to foundry and equipment. He offers a pragmatic, no-nonsense roadmap for progress, emphasizing the critical need for measurable goals, government-led demand creation, and a fundamental shift in mindset from mere local production to true self-belief (Aatmanirbharta). This is an essential conversation for anyone looking to understand the real challenges and immense opportunities in building India’s deep-tech future.

YouTube episode link:

Key Insights:

In a compelling and pragmatic discussion on Chai & Chips, GS Madhusudan (Madhu for short), Co-founder & CEO of InCore Semiconductors, laid out a clear-eyed blueprint for India’s journey toward semiconductor sovereignty. Moving beyond high-level view, Madhusudan provided a granular, actionable framework for founders, policymakers, and investors. His insights reveal an ecosystem at a critical inflection point, where strategic choices made today will define India’s role in the global technology landscape for decades to come.

Here are the key insights and takeaways from the dialogue.

1. Deconstruct the Ecosystem: A Vertical-by-Vertical Approach

Madhusudan argues that a single, monolithic “semiconductor strategy” is meaningless. The industry is not one entity but a collection of at least five distinct verticals: Design, Product, Packaging, Foundry, and Equipment. Each is at a different stage of maturity in India—from a well-established design ecosystem to a nascent equipment industry.

His prescription is simple yet profound: conduct a capability audit for each vertical and set separate, concrete, and measurable goals. Instead of a vague 2030 vision, the goal should be specific: “Our fabless guys need to turn out 100 million chips by 2030.” This targeted approach allows for focused effort and prevents the complexities of one vertical from stalling progress in another.

2. The “25 by 25” Vision: A Measurable Goal for a Nation

To anchor India’s ambition, Madhusudan proposes a powerful and memorable goal: the 25 by 25 vision. The objective is for India to capture 25% of the global market for semiconductors costing below $25. This targets the high-volume, mature-node segment where India can realistically build a dominant position. This is not just about manufacturing; it’s about owning the design and product value chain. This vision provides a clear, quantifiable benchmark for success that can align the entire ecosystem.

3. The True Meaning of Aatmanirbharta: From Local Production to Self-Belief

One of the most powerful themes was Madhusudan’s redefinition of Aatmanirbharta (self-reliance). He stressed that it goes far beyond the simplistic idea of local manufacturing.

“Aatmanirbharta is not just doing stuff locally, it’s believing in yourself. People miss that aspect of it.”

True self-reliance is about having the courage to conceptualize, the confidence to innovate, and the resilience to fail and try again. This cultural shift from a service-execution mindset to a product-ideation mindset is the fundamental prerequisite for building an indigenous technology ecosystem.

4. Building the “Boring” Foundation: The Unsung Heroes

Success in semiconductors isn’t just about glamorous, cutting-edge technology. Madhusudan emphasizes the critical importance of building the “boring” but essential product ecosystem: supply chains, distribution networks, marketing, field application support, and RMA processes. He uses the analogy of building a base camp before attempting to summit Mount Everest—it’s a long, arduous process that takes years but is non-negotiable for success.

This requires courage, which he notes comes from experience and a deep network. He highlights the crucial role of unsung heroes like EMS (Electronics Manufacturing Services) companies and distributors, who provide the market intelligence and logistical backbone necessary to turn a chip design into a commercially viable product.

5. The Government’s Role: Being a Demand Facilitator

Madhusudan is unequivocal about the government’s role. Its most powerful tool is not equity funding but demand creation. By implementing strong mandates for local procurement in strategic sectors (meters, smart cards, government hardware), the government can guarantee a market for Indian-designed chips. This de-risks the venture for private capital, making VC funding far more accessible.

Government’s strength lies in being a strategic customer and a facilitator, creating a simple, predictable regulatory environment that encourages innovation rather than stifling it with red tape.

6. RISC-V: The Democratic Enabler of Choice and Innovation

RISC-V is a game-changer because it is an open and democratic instruction set architecture (ISA). Unlike proprietary ISAs like Arm or x86, it provides “choice.” This lowers the barrier to entry for startups and allows for deep customization and innovation without prohibitive licensing fees. While the open nature presents challenges like potential fragmentation, it also harnesses the collective brainpower of a global community, accelerating progress in a way closed ecosystems cannot. For India, leveraging RISC-V is a strategic imperative to build a sovereign and innovative chip ecosystem.

7. A Call to Action: Humility, Patience, and Hard Work

The journey is a marathon, not a sprint. Madhusudan calls for a “large dose of humility,” especially from industry veterans, who should see their role as laying the foundational “bricks in a wall” for the next generation. For aspiring founders, his advice is clear: know your market well. Spend time understanding customer needs before perfecting the technology. The ecosystem desperately needs more marketing and business-savvy leaders to complement its deep technical talent. Ultimately, building a successful deep-tech company is 99% hard work—a relentless focus on the details that turn a magical idea into a tangible reality.

Connect with our Guest:

• InCore Semiconductors: https://incoresemi.com/

• G S Madhusudan on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/gsmadhusudan/

Follow Chai & Chips:

• Subscribe on YouTube(Chai & Chips - YouTube), Spotify(Chai & Chips Podcast | Podcast on Spotify), Apple Podcasts(Chai & Chips Podcast - Podcast - Apple Podcasts) or your favourite podcast platform to never miss an episode.

• Leave a review—it helps us reach more listeners!

• Follow Prakash on LinkedIn(Prakash Mallya | LinkedIn) and X(Prakash Mallya (@PrakashMallya) / X) for updates.

Episode Transcript

Speakers:

• Prakash Mallya (Host)

• G S Madhusudan (Guest)

(00:04) Madhu: Semiconductor has like about five to six verticals. Correct? You have the design ecosystem, which exists courtesy MNC companies, courtesy local companies, we are very mature. Then you have the product ecosystem, which is almost non-existent. But large companies like L&T Semi, IVP, Axero, and smaller companies like Mindgrove are coming about, NetraSemi that is there, right? So that’s the start of a revolution. Then you have the packaging industry which is starting to come, investments are getting made. Then you got the foundry industry, which is just taking baby steps. Then you have the equipment industry, which is almost non-existent. I mean who supplies the equipment to the foundry, right? So, each of those verticals, my standard advice is, look, do a capability audit and set reasonable goals for that particular sector.

(00:56) Madhu: So, saying we will reach some place in 2030 is meaningless. You should say, okay, our fabless guys need to turn out 100 million chips by 2030. That’s a goal for the fabless sector. But always wanted to do processors, always wanted to do vector processors for some reason. And so InCore is almost a bucket list item. But I never trained as a processor guy.

(01:19) Madhu: Aatmanirbharta is not just doing stuff locally, it’s believing in yourself. People miss that aspect of it. India probably needs to have 25% of the world’s market in semiconductors costing below $25. For me it’s a 25 by 25. One fourth of the market should be chips designed in India.

(01:44) Prakash: Welcome everyone. Welcome to Chai & Chips. This is Prakash and today we have with us Madhu. Madhu for short is the Co-founder and CEO of InCore Semiconductors, one of the first processor IP companies of India. He was also the Co-founder and still is of Shakti, our RISC-V, India’s RISC-V venture, which has done tremendously well and we’ll talk about it. He has held a variety of different roles across technology and startup businesses and R&D organizations around the world. He’s an advisor to Indian government and most recently he has been the advisor to Government of India in AI task force as well.

(02:29) Prakash: I wanted to quote a quote from Madhu in some past conversations just to give you a measure of the person himself. So he said, “We had Green Revolution to make sure we grew our own food. We need Silicon Revolution so that we can feed our computing needs ourselves.” So with that context, ladies and gentlemen, Madhu, welcome to Chai & Chips.

(02:56) Madhu: Thanks a lot for inviting me. I’m really glad to be here.

(03:01) Prakash: So, I’ve seen and read and listened to many, several conversations you have done in the recent past and you have been very clear and sometimes unapologetic about the semiconductor strategy India should pursue. So, I wanted to dive deeper into this conversation about the why, what, and how of the strategy of building the indigenous and strategic chip ecosystem for India. I hope that is okay with you, Madhu.

(03:32) Madhu: Oh, that’s perfectly fine.

(03:34) Madhu: So, the problem is everybody says strategy, right? As if it’s a single problem to be solved. Semiconductor is like about five to six verticals, correct? You have the design ecosystem which exists courtesy MNC companies, courtesy local companies. We are very mature. Then you have the product ecosystem, which is almost non-existent. But large companies like L&T Semi, IVP, Axero, and smaller companies like Mindgrove are coming about. NetraSemi that is there, right? So that’s the start of a revolution.

(04:10) Madhu: Then you have the packaging industry which is starting to come, investments are getting made. Then you got the foundry industry which is just taking baby steps. Then you have the equipment industry which is almost non-existent. I mean who supplies the equipment to the foundry, right? So each of those verticals my standard advice is, look, do a capability audit and set reasonable goals for that particular sector.

(04:34) Madhu: So, saying we will reach some place in 2030 is meaningless. You should say, okay, our fabless guys need to turn out 100 million chips by 2030. That’s a goal for the fabless sector. The design industry should be designing along with similar to Broadcom and Marvell of saying at least if we don’t design the top of the line uh AI/ML training or ML chips, we should be at an 80% level and we should have at least two of the majors say AWS and Google as our customers.

(05:06) Madhu: In the equipment industry you can say that look, we need all the base gases and all of that and we should at least be supplying equipment at a 90 nanometer level. In the fabs you should say okay, we need, do you need silicon carbide fabs? Yeah, we need because we are, we consume a lot of power parts and all that, right? But we also need mixed signal fabs and up to 40 nanometer is okay. I’m satisfied with that, right?

(05:30) Madhu: So each vertical in the semiconductor needs a certain vision, it needs a roadmap, we need to figure out how much of public private contribution needs to be there. So, I would prefer to see a task force and mission mode for each vertical and let each one of them take their own course. Talking about semiconductor as a whole does not do justice to what is a very vast industry.

(05:52) Madhu: My prescriptive advice, I stick only to fabless and IP because that’s all I know, right? I’m not going to tell a packaging guy to do this and stuff. I know they do wire bonding and stuff and that’s all I, I get it, right? Whether we should do 2.5D, we should do 3D, it all depends on what devices you make. And same thing with the fabs also, right?

(06:12) Madhu: So we need to split the problem into six different problems, have a roadmap, and have concrete vision. The key thing is to have measurable goals otherwise you can’t measure progress. The fundamental problem we have is what are we supposed to do say in the fabless by 2028? Can we take five chips? Smart cards, electricity meters, IP camera, handheld terminal chips, a general-purpose controller chips and say that we will be shipping 2 million of these by 2028, each of these. 10 million total, right? Doesn’t matter. It can be a small goal, it can be a large goal. But we need concrete goals, we need measurable goals and we need to set such goal for each sector.

(06:54) Madhu: I don’t see such a comprehensive approach yet, but everybody’s strapped for bandwidth. I’m not going to blame MeitY on this, okay? MeitY is strapped for cash, MeitY is strapped for bandwidth and so there’s only so much you can expect the government to do. I frankly think it is up to the private sector to step up.

(07:12) Prakash: So let me try and unpack all of what you said during the course of this conversation, right? So the first part is something you have mentioned in the past and you alluded to it in your comments as well, is we are as a country, despite having great amount of chip talent, 20-25% of the chip designers based in India of the global supply, we are on the execution end of the supply chain. So you have an IP or an idea coming from abroad, you execute on it. What is the gap? What makes us stop short from defining our own ideas versus just executing on the ideas that come from abroad?

(07:56) Madhu: In one simple word, courage. The courage to conceptualize a product and push through does not come from raw courage. It also comes from experience. So when all the MNCs came here, we basically designed products based on somebody else’s specs. We might have suggested an architecture change and all of that. In the architecture itself we have progressed. So, you do have designers who can innovate an architecture, that’s not a problem. Intel, AMD, TI, Analog Devices, to name a few, have created very forward-thinking designers. But at a product level, we never had product visionaries, quite simply those roles were not needed in India.

(08:36) Madhu: So even the best of sales guys were always given a line card from the US and said, say go sell this. Now I know all, most of them I know, okay, I’m pretty sure they’re all listening. They can ideate. They were never given a chance to ideate. So, if the local head of sales for say one particular company says, “Hey, this is a great product for India,” I don’t think his idea was entertained. Right? So, we never gave a chance for people in the sales and marketing organizations in India to create products, to fail in creating products. Doesn’t matter, right? You give it four tries, you get four failures, the fifth one will succeed, right? That’s what I said, it comes with experience. Confidence doesn’t come because you’re arrogant. Confidence comes because you’ve built that network.

(09:27) Madhu: Look, the product ecosystem is very network-based, okay? So if I want to do a product, the first thing is I’ll go to a disti. I’ll ask him, “Look, I want to do this chip.” He’ll say, “Madhu, I sell 5 lakh a year. I sell them for about $2.” Okay? Now the first thing he’ll say, ignore the auto guys, they need qual and all that, they will never touch a startup. But I do have guys who are doing very non-critical, like this door management system and stuff who’d be willing to take a gamble on you. I think I can sell about 100,000 parts at about a $1.80 because you need to be about 10-15 cheaper, right? This conversation that happens, that is what gives me confidence in launching a part.

(10:08) Madhu: So we need an ecosystem of product creators, product marketing guys, and a distributors who are willing to talk to you. This network takes time to build. It doesn’t come in a day. Okay? Now the distributor also won’t take a risk on you unless you’ve shipped a few parts, otherwise he will burn his fingers, correct? So he needs to know that you got a product ecosystem that not only can deliver good parts, you got proper RMA, you got proper field application support, you got the software stack, uh you got the supply chain done, you have reasonable MOQs, you have a tie up with a foundry that if suddenly an order picks up you can deliver. All of this matters, correct? This ecosystem of creating a supply chain is almost non-existent in India.

(10:52) Madhu: Okay. So, if you suddenly say we need to become a product nation, you can’t create all of this, right? My standard example is you don’t attack Mount Everest, right? You build the base camp. And it takes about 10 years to build the base camp. Building a base camp is boring stuff. Most of what is involved in this is extremely boring stuff. It is not glamour technology, right? It’s run of the mill stuff. It is no different from setting a supply chain to supply rice. Very few people want to do this. But there is a reason why Tim Cook is the CEO of Apple, right? The dude has got supply chains figured out. It happens in the armed forces also. I think Patton or somebody said, professionals talk about logistics, amateurs talk about strategy. Correct? It’s logistics, it’s supply chain, it’s boring, mundane stuff that we need to invest in. There’s no shortcut to that. And that’s what we need to do.

(11:44) Prakash: Let me ask you, for the benefit of your audience, MOQ is minimum order quantity. And a follow-on I had was, I agree with what you said, and you started your career in HCL if I’m not wrong. I started my career in Wipro. Both of them were hardware companies at one point in time. And we lost a lot of IP or product capability over time. What do you think went wrong?

(12:13) Madhu: Oh I know exactly what went wrong because I’ve had those conversations umpteen times with all the senior guys both at Wipro and HCL. Easy money. Easy money. As a team, I’ll tell you for example what happened at HCL, right? HCL did everything. Correct? Hardware local, operating system local. The first HCL operating system Alpha was written from scratch in Chennai. And I remember when I joined, the operating system was being deprecated. The last copy of the operating system was being sold to the rabriwala (the paper guy). I was almost in tears. This is an operating system that you wrote from scratch, you’re not maintained copies of it, and the last printed copy is being sold as for paper recycling. That’s the value. I keep asking HCL, do you guys have a museum where all the stuff that HCL has created is there? I wish they were. Same thing for Wipro, same thing for ECIL, like five companies that did great stuff, correct? So in HCL what happened? So the reason I went to the US was actually to port Sybase onto HCL hardware. So the initial HCL teams that went to the US was actually on a collaborative mission. Then Sybase found out that we had great engineers and said, “Hey, why can’t they help us on other things and all of that, right?” So slowly they smelt blood. But HCL did the ethical thing. HCL didn’t say HCL. We were all placed in a company called Hindustan Manpower Training Services. So HCL said, if I’m going to do services, I won’t be a hypocrite. I will call it services. HCL R&D was kept separate. The body shopping, which is what it is, was kept separate, right? Then they did the, but HCL had a problem. Look, the ecosystem in India was not good enough to create a world class hardware.

(14:03) Madhu: So when HCL tried to ramp up, there were quality ramping up problems and all of that. And so Arjun Malhotra went to the US to start selling HCL boxes, not to create services. HCL America was created as an offshoot for selling hardware in the US. It’s not as if HCL didn’t try. So please don’t blame people, right? It was difficult. Then the HCL-HP merger happened and they kind of like broke apart and stuff. And it became tough to compete with the foreign hardware companies and the government I don’t think was very supportive at that point of time. So, it was a combination of easy money from services and a desire to survive that made all these companies go into services.

(14:44) Madhu: Hey, by the way, HCL owns Lotus Notes now. HCL owns Ingres. Okay, so they they are a bonafide product company. And same thing with, I mean TCS sells TCS BaNCS, Infosys sells Finacle. Why do you keep calling them services companies? See, you need to make a distinction between services as a business model and services as a talent model. If a UK company builds you a Formula One car, you don’t call that company a services company. You call them a tech company that can build you a Formula One car. If somebody builds you a rocket custom built, you call them a great tech company. So why do you persist in calling HCL and Wipro and Infosys and TCS service companies? I think you’re doing injustice to the talent that is there in those companies. They have chosen services as a business model doesn’t mean they’re not investing in technology.

(15:45) Prakash: That’s fair. So let me ask you a question on the comment you made earlier about having the courage and conviction of the market and diving in to create a product. So, wind the story back now versus how it used to be on hardware, when we had a set of products but we somehow lost the capabilities to build products here on the hardware side including semiconductor. And today, what are the systemic issues that you see or are there things that we could do better for aspiring founders to invest more of their energy in building products, especially chips and hardware products out of India?

(16:30) Madhu: Look, I advise a lot of startups. I work with a lot of them. I don’t spend much time, occasional conversations, right? Every startup is a techie-led startup. I can barely maybe one or two startups which come from a marketing background. InCore is one of the few companies where one of the co-founders has got significant management and marketing experience and IP creation experience, right? But experience like ours is pretty rare. So, most of them are very deep tech startups, excellent technical talent, but most of them have no clue about the market. Can’t blame them, that’s not where they came from. Correct?

(17:12) Madhu: So I don’t know what the answer is. So, the biggest problem we have is it’s very, next to impossible to hire a good VP of Marketing. We were very fortunate to get Deepak Sahu, our Head of Marketing. IIM-B guy, spent 10 years at Hyperverge and other companies and stuff, right, has done marketing around the world for product companies, right? He may not be a semiconductor guy, but he knows how to go to market and create and all of that, right? So he’s a good find. But people like him are tough to find. Right? And that is a lacuna. So my standard sound bite answer is, the IITs have done the job, it’s now time for the IIMs to do their job. So, we even toyed with that. In fact, I talked to folks at IIM Bangalore. We probably need to create workshops to help create VPs of Marketing. Do case studies on how to launch a product, how to identify market opportunities, how to set up supply chain. How do you break into a market where there are 20 MNCs who have cornered the market? Where do you get the courage? How do you find a spot? You just need to find that one weak spot, right? And then keep driving that nail through it. That is where the courage comes.

(18:29) Prakash: Does the Valley train the founders any differently? Because they seem to be doing it so much better for several decades and great companies have come out of them.

(18:38) Madhu: No, the Valley is a comprehensive ecosystem. The Indian ecosystem is very lopsided. This is a very techie ecosystem. And it’s a cultural problem also, right? The Valley values risk-taking. Indian culture doesn’t. There, failure is a badge of honor. Here it’s a mark of shame. So, the culture conspires against you. It’s changing, it’s changing. Right? Look, I’m not blaming anybody. This is not a blame game. These kind of cultural shifts take time and you and I can keep pontificating till the cows come home. Things will happen in their sweet time.

(19:17) Prakash: And I feel at least my parents would prefer for me to take a salaried job. But I think the next generation, especially the number of founders coming out of India in any sector is so much higher, order of magnitudes higher than when I came out of college. So definitely things are improving.

(19:38) Madhu: No, my dad was just the opposite, right? I still remember an episode. He suddenly came and said, I don’t know if you’ve heard of Travancore Titanium. There are a PSU and dad was an advisor to the government and all that. So he used to handle a lot of BIFR cases and all that sick industries and all that. So he said, “Travancore Titanium is gone bankrupt and stuff. Do you kind of want to do a leveraged buyout and take it over?” I said, “Why on earth?” He said, “You kept talking about titanium.” Titanium is material science, is of interest to me purely as a hobby, academic interest. So he just assumed that if a titanium company came up for sale, I would dump everything and run that. So, he didn’t think twice. He said, “Look, should I talk to some of my friends and we can see if we can take it over?” I said, “Dad, that just was a hobby thing, I’m not that serious, right?” So, he never discouraged me. If I said that look I’m going to start a company, he will simply say yes and saying that if you need help getting a good board of directors, let me know, I’ll get you. If you need, right? He would assume that if I thought of something that I would have thought it through, I would be treated as an adult and his only thing was go do it properly. That’s all. Nothing else. Never, not even a sentence of, he would never even say have you thought it through. He just assumed that whatever if I say, I’m serious about it, right? That kind of home atmosphere helped a lot.

(21:04) Prakash: 100% agree. Yeah. And from what I’ve read, he also advised you or coached you on how to run a business based on his experience of running a business.

(21:15) Madhu: Oh, it’s far more than coach, right? I’m a third-generation CEO. So, he taught me PE investing when I was 14, read balance sheets, how to do projections, how to evaluate a company, how to evaluate a company in half an hour, look at the numbers and stuff and all that, right? And then he would also tell me how his board meetings went, how to handle board conflicts, how to hire the right HR, and also more importantly, how to delegate. And these were explicit instructions. In fact, the only thing he would ever gift me year after year was the latest ROC notifications, tax law changes, and GST changes. I don’t think he gave me ever anything in my life other than that. I mean, I’m not seen him, I don’t remember him giving me a shirt or anything like that, right? Promptly every year anything related to corporate affairs, the necessary documentation, he would send it across and say read. That’s all.

(22:08) Prakash: Well, in the end, that added huge value to you in terms of everything you’ve achieved.

(22:14) Madhu: That is for other people to judge whether I’ve been successful as a CEO is in various vendors and stuff. I will not venture an opinion, right?

(22:22) Prakash: Achieved things that not too many people do in terms of processor IP company, how many exist in this world? So, fantastic job.

(22:31) Madhu: That was an interest for me right from college. So, I was starting to dabble with 8-bit processors all of that. I’m an electronics major by training. I’m not a software guy. But I came to HCL because there’s no other job available. TCS wanted to offer me some COBOL product job which I was not interested and living in Bombay on 3,000 rupees a month back in that time was not keen….I didn’t want to live in Bombay. Chennai was, we had our home and all that, so that was the case. So I took that job. But always wanted to do processors, always wanted to do vector processors for some reason. And so InCore is almost a bucket list item. But I never trained as a processor guy. I am eternally grateful to Neil Gala, Gautam Doshi and Arjun Menon my founders in Shakti. Look, I can’t design processor on my own, right? Together we created something that let me scratch my itch also. I’m grateful to them.

(23:32) Prakash: So, to go back to what we are talking about, product conceptualization and IP. And you have at length talked about how in different segments and drawn fantastic parallels from those segments like two-wheelers, garments, and even whiskies, where India has put the country on the map by developing great IP, conceptualizing it locally and scaling it globally. So, what things could you draw from it or one or two areas that can apply to semiconductors, chips, manufacturing as well that we could take forward as Made in India products?

(24:12) Madhu: Have you heard of Windmill fans?

(24:15) Prakash: Yes, I have.

(24:17) Madhu: So, I got like about four of them, right? You know where their background is, right? They used to do the railway fans that you see on the top of, right? That that old fans that you see, that cage fan in the old train. So that is a family that’s been doing it almost since independence. So, this is the second or third generation which said, “Why don’t we do designer fans?” And their fans start at 20,000 rupees minimum. And go up to a lakh plus and all of that, right? Designer fans, whatever material you want, you can give a sketch and they’ll do a fan for you on that, right? So, they ideated, they felt there’s a need in the market. It’s a very high-end market, they export a lot. Correct? So even in chips, you simply need to sit down, just go to your nearest consumer electronic store and look at all the products that Croma is selling. Take a guess as to what chips are there inside. Correct? Then go talk to the distributor to see what is the price, what are the volumes and stuff, right? You need to educate yourself. You need to have a feel for the market.

(25:15) Madhu: Again, some of this I learned from my dad, right? I mean running the company he would always delegate, but he would spend a lot of time in the Sataa Bazar in Bombay, actually used to spend a lot of time with, I think Dhirubhai Ambani’s brother, the guy who was in the cotton textile trade side of it, and stuff. So what do you do there? He says, “No, Madhu, I just feel the pulse of the market because I’m buying cotton from the mill, so I need to have a pulse of the market to figure out what price to buy, when.” So being a public sector CEO, he would actually buy on the spot market without a contract or without prior approval. The government used to scream at him and he said, “Look, you can’t negotiate. Cotton market you’re there in the market, suddenly you see a price drop, you sign a contract and you buy immediately because a written contract won’t get honored after a period of time.” Correct? So you need to have a feel for the market. See, we take a too a techie an approach to products. Products are products. Doesn’t matter if you’re selling t-shirts, you’re selling two-wheelers. Fundamentally they’re all the same, right? You need to have a feel for the industry. And a lot of us are coming into the industry knowing only one part of the industry and that’s why we are failing.

(26:25) Prakash: Yeah. I’m an engineer, but my background is sales, and what you said, absolutely resonates with me. The market savvy and pulse of the market is so important to build products that customers want, not what you think customers will buy.

(26:41) Madhu: So what I do is I often go to Ritchie Street which is the equivalent of Lamington Road, right? I have a friend. And I just sit by his side, he’ll be in the counter, and see who buys. Whether Gigabyte sells more, ASUS sells more, do people ask for more PCIe slots, less PCIe slots, how much GB of RAM do they buy? Correct? Which size monitor? Do they buy backlit, are people going for OLED and stuff? You just sit for three hours and just watch people ask. You’ll get a feel for what happens in the PC market.

(27:10) Prakash: So that’s a good segue into taking somewhat of a short break and doing a set of lightning round questions. Are you okay with it?

(27:20) Madhu: Yeah.

(27:21) Prakash: Should be fun. Okay, so let me ask you one word to describe the current state of India’s semiconductor strategy.

(27:32) Madhu: Early exploration.

(27:34) Prakash: Those are two words.

(27:36) Madhu: Exploration.

(27:38) Prakash: What’s the most overhyped aspect of the global semiconductor industry right now?

(27:43) Madhu: AI chips.

(27:44) Prakash: If you could instantly solve one non-technical problem in India’s deep tech and semiconductor ecosystem, what would it be?

(27:52) Madhu: Market linkage.

(27:53) Prakash: Beyond technical expertise, what’s one crucial soft skill for a processor architect or a chip founder?

(28:00) Madhu: I would say ideation.

(28:01) Prakash: One passion of yours outside of chips and building complex systems.

(28:06) Madhu: Oh, animal welfare.

(28:07) Prakash: Your ideal chai & chips combo while debugging a complex chip design.

(28:12) Madhu: I would say ice cream.

(28:13) Prakash: Okay. That works. So coming back to the first part of the conversation was more oriented towards what it will take, what are the gaps in terms of product conceptualization and bringing some of those expertise up in the market like India. The second part of this conversation I wanted to focus on InCore and what makes you guys unique, what’s been the unique value you’ve been able to add as it relates to the strategy that you were talking about. So the first part of this conversation would be InCore, you’ve got processor and IP focus. It’s based on RISC-V which is quite dramatic the progress you have made in the past several years. You build an ecosystem of creating reference designs for different segments and more recently you did System on Chip generator, SOC generator, which cuts cycle time from months to minutes. So, what makes InCore unique and how does it tie into the strategy that you have been advocating for strategic autonomy for India in semiconductors?

(29:26) Madhu: One word is probably not the answer you’re expecting. It’s empathy for our customer. Look, we started by doing cores and fabrics. Our USP at that point of time was we did generators so that you could do very customized cores and stuff. So it was a technical differentiator and quite unique in the world. So there’s no cookie cutter standard parts in terms of IP. You want more cache, you want an extra functional unit, all of that can be done, right? Add an instruction, all of that. So technically we are pretty cutting edge in that aspect.

(30:06) Madhu: Other things also, we used a very high-level language called Bluespec which apart from dramatically increasing productivity also dramatically increases quality because a whole class of errors cannot come when you do with Bluespec. For example, the Verilog it generates is guaranteed synthesizable. Correct? So there’s a whole host of tech. So InCore not only pioneered RISC-V cores, it also pioneered how you build a CPU, including building CPU talent in the country, right? So a lot of that. But that was a necessary but not a sufficient condition. If you look at how InCore has evolved, and we have evolved quite rapidly over the past just 18 months. We have gone from doing core to fabrics and security accelerators to creating SocGen, right? SocGen is just the tip of the iceberg because what InCore is doing essentially is solving the how do you build a SOC problem.

(31:04) Prakash: And what is SocGen, if I may ask?

(31:05) Madhu: SocGen is a tool that takes our RISC-V cores, our fabric, takes third party IP, and builds you an SOC at the digital level. Right? And it basically gives you FPGA output also so that you can immediately test the SOC on an FPGA. It generates some verification collateral which we’ll be adding more as we go along. It generates device driver stubs. Correct? We also have a process by which one time you can import any third-party IP. Correct? It also generates the full documentation.

(31:37) Prakash: And before you move forward, I would request you to share with our audience in simple terms, what is RISC-V? And what makes it different from every other CPU architecture that exists in this world?

(31:55) Madhu: RISC-V is just an ISA specification. Right? ISA basically is a combination of an alphabet and a grammar of how the computer at the lowest level computes data. If you got a high-level program in C or something, your compiler translates that into instructions and those instructions are the one that get executed. The instruction format is what RISC-V standardizes. Plainly put, if you look at it purely technically, RISC-V is no different from any of the other ISAs that have come across. Its key aspect is it’s open. Right? There’s no royalty, there’s no patents on that. You are free to do whatever you want. The x86 cannot be licensed because Intel and AMD don’t license it to other people. Arm is licensed, but it is proprietary, which comes with its own challenges. Technically Arm is good, right? Please don’t get the impression that I’m badmouthing Arm. It’s a great ISA. Arm has done a great job in creating this industry. But because it’s a proprietary ISA, that comes along with its own set of legal and business issues and so on. And if you want to for example, you’re doing a device, you want to change the ISA, you can’t do that unless you get an architecture license, that is expensive, right? So dealing with Arm can be a business issue. It’s not technically it’s a mature ISA, it’s a good ISA.

(33:10) Madhu: RISC-V opens it up and makes the ISA definition and use of ISA a lot more democratic. It comes with its own set of problems in the sense that potentially it can fragment and all of that and you have multiple choices and all of that. So early adopters need to have a strong stomach to use RISC-V. But now the industry has standardized. There are a lot of standard definitions, standard parts and all of that. So RISC-V, at least in the embedded segment is on par with Arm in terms of maturity, in terms of ease of use. So you can take a risk on, bet on RISC-V that is not more of a risk compared to taking a bet on Arm. There’s a pun there, but let’s ignore that, right? That is unintentional. When it comes to the higher end segment, RISC-V is getting there. I suspect in about two to three years RISC-V will catch up. And in some respects, it will probably exceed Arm faster because, very simply put, there are more brains working on extending the ISA compared to Arm. The ecosystem is much wider and deeper. Much wider, right? There are literally thousands of people working at problems. So RISC-V will throw up 20 possible solutions for a problem. That’s a double-edged sword. You have 20 solutions now to solve a problem. So I’m not downplaying the problem that causes, but if you’re an innovative company, then you really have choices, correct?

(34:39) Madhu: So for people who can leverage RISC-V, it’s a great thing. But that also, but if you come to somebody like us or other RISC-V companies, we will also narrow down the choices for you and give you something that you’re comfortable with. So RISC-V accommodates both type of companies. Companies who don’t want to make too many choices and stuff, “Okay, tell me what a safe approach is.” That can be done. Or companies that say, “Look, I want to experiment, I want the most cutting edge. I’m willing to put people into it and I know I’ll have problems and I’m okay with that.” It accommodates that also. So RISC-V is all about choice. Again, I’m not blaming Arm. A proprietary ISA necessarily has to restrict choice, otherwise you can’t. If Arm allows every customer to change the ISA, they would go out of business. It is the nature of being a proprietary ISA that is an issue and not because Arm itself is a bad company or something like that, right? So the battle is not between Arm and RISC-V, the battle is between a proprietary ISA and an open ISA. And the world will decide which works better for what circumstance.

(35:45) Prakash: So suppose you but you need not suppose, you actually have an open architecture. You have commercial ventures like InCore and several other chip companies coming up in India building on top of that. You have fixed or get better on product conceptualization and IP creation locally. What segments would you as InCore and other such companies focus on in India to create strong momentum and drive local consumption? You initially talked about let’s pick five or six designs and build volume. What would those segments be?

(36:26) Madhu: Actually we’ve written a paper on that and published that almost like two, three years ago. I got iSPIRT to publish it based on some work that I’d done. The segments are well-known. If you look at what we are consuming, we are consuming smart cards, we are consuming meter chips, we are consuming IP camera chips, we are consuming general purpose application processor chips that go in handheld terminals, Aadhaar terminals, panels and all that. This would be equivalent to an NXP. So you remember Intel had these StrongARM chips, right? Those category chips. So you’re basically talking 400 MHz to 1.2 GHz, quad-core with a little bit of display and video codecs and so on. BLDC controllers, standard control,mixed-signal chips, some automotive controllers. So there are like about five to 10 chips which drive most of the volume.

(37:18) Madhu: So, actually if you go to Arrow or Avnet or any of them, they’ll tell you what is shipping in volume, correct? It’s a very easy exercise to do. I did this exercise for the defence folks. I actually was an advisor to Bharat Electronics for about 18 months or so. So we actually sat down and did a detailed analysis. They were using 40 different processors across systems. Can you imagine? Ranging from an 8-bit to a 64-bit. Each one has got a different debugger, each one has got a different compiler and stuff and all that. It’s because you buy equipment from across the world, everybody has got their favourite chips, right? There’s nothing wrong. This is a problem that was thrust on BEL. BEL did not create the problem. BEL has got its own internal. So we found that we could, 80% of that you could map to just two chips that we created locally. And we started a program on that. Unfortunately, that did not see the light of the day. It’s called the D1 and the D2 processors. That’s there in my blog also. Okay. So, we found that we could match 40 CPUs just into two chips. We looked at all tanks, missiles, aircraft, everything, right? Most of the ones used in the strategic sector, not just defence, is all below 500 MHz. Okay. So that’s there, right? So those segments are very well-known. So, I often keep saying that India fabless should focus on chips costing below $10 first and hit that market.

(38:44) Prakash: So a follow-on in that is, suppose you identify those segments, whatever those segments are, right? How will the model work? What is the production or demand side of it? What is the supply side of it? Where does government play a role, if at all?

(39:02) Madhu: The government just has to do just one thing, which is demand creation. And we’ve been asking this for a long time. We need mandates for local procurement. The instant you put in a mandate, the VCs will fund it. The government does not have to fund at all. If you got sufficient mandates, you don’t need the DLI type programs for those categories. But if you want to do DLI, and MeitY has done an excellent job of doing the C2S program has got a BLDC program, right? That’s the right way to go. It’s not either-or. You keep doing the existing C2S, DLI and all that, that can continue, right? As the MeitY secretary once put it, he said, “Madhu, I want to make sure no startup complains 10 years down the line they’re starved for funds.” Of the 100 companies I’m funding, most of them I’m expecting to not make it. That is perfectly okay. But I want to make sure starvation of funds is not the reason they failed. That’s a very enlightened approach take, correct? So that will go on a tangent, correct? But if for, if we identify five chips and have a focused DLI only for those five chips, I would go so far as to say that why not get for example, C-DAC to do two of those chips based on our core, somebody else’s core and just license the GDSII to 10 people and say fabricate.

Prakash: And they could be anywhere in the world because fab may not be that much of a value-add versus before that in the entire value chain, right?

(40:33) Madhu: So there are multiple approaches. By no means am I preaching. These are just ideas coming from me. There may be terrible ideas. That’s for somebody else to judge. It’s some options that I’m offering, that’s about it. Take it for what it’s worth.

(40:49) Prakash: And in that model, suppose you consider five segments, you have DLI for that. Just to play this out completely, and some of your past conversations, you have been frustrated saying it is not for government to solve everything, it is for private sector to take the lead, and I completely agree with that. And at the same time, every other part of the world where semiconductor ecosystems have evolved, they have evolved because of active and I would say proactive state support. So what’s the balance that the government can play in terms of a role? What kind of intervention, nuanced intervention can government do to really keep a balance on driving local consumption, driving volume, but at the same time not really stifling private innovation and giving rise to sometimes trade disputes? So, what’s the balance you think we can have in that model?

(41:49) Madhu: We’ll have to learn that as we go along. That’s like saying what is the balance that works between two people in a marriage before you even met each other, correct? See, the key thing is no blame. Don’t blame anybody. Okay? Everybody has got the right intention. Don’t doubt people’s intention. Not the government, not the private sector, right? There is no enemy in this. Okay? Everybody wants to do the right thing. There are bound to be differences. We need to know how to resolve those conflicts, put them aside, and work for the better good. So that is where you start. Then you come on a common forum and say that look... but like I said, you need concrete goals. The goal I would like to see is a very simple goal. In 2028, can we ship 10 million microcontroller type parts out of this country? Designed in India, manufactured anywhere else, hopefully packaged in India, but need not be so. Pick a couple. See, I’ll tell you what the problem is, right? All of this is new. So there’s a great deal of fear. Once we get two to five successful chips, most of those fears will vanish, right? So all your fears would have been crystallized and you will know that some fears were not justified, some fears were justified. You will figure out how to tackle those fears which came true and the fears that didn’t come true, you realize that is just theoretical thinking on your part. So practice makes perfect. You and I can keep pontificating, but we need to get five separate chips out and then a lot of things will fall into place, the fear will go away.

(43:33) Prakash: Action is the only thing.

(43:34) Madhu: Action is the only remedy to get over this hurdle. It may fail, it may, all of that, right? Fear of failure, just ignore. Just go ahead with it and get it out. These are not complex chips. They will cost you what, 5-7 million dollars till mask creation. I’m not talking about placing wafer orders, right? Say 10 million dollars per chip, per chip.

(43:59) Prakash: So if you’re saying five or seven projects, so times...

(44:02) Madhu: 50 million dollars, 70 million dollars. That’s chump change for this country. So, if we spend 50-70 million dollars, we will have five good chips in five categories that can ship in volume in about three years. Why don’t we take that gamble?

(44:19) Prakash: Agree. And do you think the targets or the goals, one of them is definitely X amount of volume by this time frame. Great goal to have as a country. Are there non-numerical goals? The reason why I’m asking this is 5-7 years out, if you’ve achieved that volume, what else would take or make India have a stronger seat at the table in the semiconductor landscape around the world?

(44:49) Madhu: Actually the reason we are even at this stage is because the EMS companies, the unsung heroes of this revolution because see, they are the base, they are the foundation. Because now I can go to an EMS company and say that what are the components you’re procuring, can I do a substitution, right? See, again, just like we insult service companies, we also insult EMS companies. “You guys just do soldering.” It’s no value. No, no, but it’s a culture, right? Our maid doesn’t add value, the guy who cleans the garbage doesn’t add value and stuff. Society is built on these bases, on service companies and EMS companies, our maids, our garbage collectors, these are the guys on whom the society rests, right? I mean they should be praised to high heavens. We don’t.

(45:37) Madhu: But the EMS companies have built a great base for us where we have a manufacturing base, right? Because now I know what products are getting manufactured, I know what products are getting sold in the country. So I would pick two, three categories, LCD TV, mobile phones, inverters, the whole power category, and do a BOM analysis and figure out what are all the chips we need to localize. And then figure out what is the strategy to convince them. See, in some cases the government can mandate, but the government can’t mandate everything, right? So, we need to have a discussion with the EMS companies on localization of the parts. Which is already happening, that can be expedited.

(46:14) Prakash: Fantastic set of recommendations. I would agree. So, switching gears, you talked about or laid out a great set of next steps we could drive towards to build a very strong foundation for chip ecosystem in India. What I would also want to talk about is looking ahead. RISC-V as a platform is a great equalizer in times of tariffs, all the challenges that the whole world is facing, and the US-China tension. But you’ve also spoken about RISC-V chips including verification of those chips to a large part is done outside of India, specifically by Chinese companies. So how would you think about the absolute digital sovereignty, semiconductor included for India as it relates to RISC-V? Does RISC-V platform offer the mitigation to the challenges and how exactly should India approach it to get to the absolute digital sovereignty?

(47:22) Madhu: Well, this is part of the work I do for the Government of India. I advise the some of the strategic folks in the defence sector and so on. So we’ve done a fair bit of analysis on that. See, we have a fairly good idea as to, first you have to decide where your strategic threats lie. Correct? And we need to figure out how to build talent to build those chips. So my recommendation always is that a country our size should have local manufacturing at least at 30% or 40%. You should never have a sector where you are import-heavy. I’m not a firm believer that you need to be an autarky, that you close the borders and stuff. Trade is useful, trade needs to be there because if you completely shut off, there’ll be everything from price gouging and people taking it easy. So the local industry needs a right balance of threats from abroad, but with the sufficient amount of support. That that balance is very tough to achieve. And it’s a dynamic balance, right? You need a very proactive government.

(48:31) Madhu: So even in the, when I talked about when I was talking to MeitY for these five chips and all of that, I saying, “Look, for nearly 100, for nearly ever since independence, the business guys have always been telling the government, please stay out, right? You guys are intruding too much. But for once, I’m begging you, please intrude.” I like working with MeitY, right? They always say, we are scared of doing prescription to the industry and stuff, right? They’re very non-intrusive in the industry and I’m going the opposite saying, please be a little more intrusive, right? Because the industry is nascent and the industry doesn’t know what to do. This is one place where the government probably needs to handhold, at least for the next 10 years. I’m not saying it has to be a permanent thing. So like I said, there’s no blame. Everybody’s trying to figure out what is the right amount of government support, correct? And there’s no answer to it. Nobody knows the answer.

(49:27) Prakash: And every country is different because. Yeah, every country is different, history, World War II, all of that and that fuelling of semiconductor industry happened very differently and may demand a different set of interventions as compared to India.

(49:40) Madhu: Yeah, there’s no, there’s no standard prescription, right? So that’s why I prefer to take a practical approach and say that look, set practical goals, work backwards as to what will work to get those things across. But once the industry is producing 100 to 200 million chips, then the government can just back off and just give support and all of that, correct? But we need to identify, your question was about strategic autonomy. We need to figure out what do we mean by strategic autonomy. Correct? So does that mean chips for LCD televisions, which is a huge market? Chips for FMCG or not FMCG, white good appliances, mobile phones, correct? So we probably need to take segments where there’s a significant import component and then figure out how to localize those and see whether we can increase chip production because once you got volume, it’s very easy to justify local designs. You don’t want to get into... See, one problem we’re going to have is DRAM and flash, correct? So you can say that look, somebody can do an embargo on DRAM and flash, but my point is there’s nothing much you can do about it. Breaking into the DRAM and flash market is not for the faint of heart. I mean, I don’t know whether people know, flash and DRAM gets sold on the stock market. You can go to dramexchange.com, you’ll get spot prices. So even when I hang around in, you know, these Ritchie Street places, all the DRAM modules are kept inside the cash, next to the cash drawer with the owner. That alone is not kept outside.

(51:02) Prakash: I did not know that.

(51:03) Madhu: Yeah, only that is kept inside, next to the cash drawer. He keeps a very close watch on it and the prices quoted are valid only for four hours. If he quotes in the morning, it’s only till lunch. If you want to buy after lunch, you’ll have to get a different quote because the prices fluctuate during the course of the day. There are people who buy RAM and flash as a commodity and trade it. They are not techies, they’ll just buy so many terabytes of RAM and stuff, just buy and sell on the stock market because the PC guys when they suddenly have a demand and they can’t get it from the factory, they’ll buy from the spot market. So it’s a pure commodity market, which means you can take years of losses. OLED is in the same category, flash is in the same category. Flash I think is finally starting to make money. We had a bit of a price downturn. So you just need to look at NAND flash prices, right? You’ll realize that it’ll never follow the same downward price curve like a typical technology product, right? It’s like oil and pork futures or soybean futures.

(52:04) Prakash: So it does require a lot of orchestration at the highest level and then down to the next level detail and then all the way down to which segments, what volume, what time frame. So yeah.

(52:15) Madhu: It’s not a simple thing. I’ve been talking to somebody to see if we can get some white papers and stuff going on on this, but then InCore is a full-time job, so somewhere hopefully if I find some time, we can write a little more on this because I don’t think people realize how complex this whole industry is. Everything from the... it’s not Semicon, right? It’s a component industry and all of that.

(52:39) Prakash: Yeah. And frankly, despite being in the semiconductor industry for a couple of decades, I must say that since I started this podcast, I’ve learned so much about the industry that I did not know, frankly.

(52:56) Madhu: Yeah, if you’re sitting inside a particular company, I think you’re at Intel for a long time, right? You’ll have a very narrow perspective depending on your role, correct? You need to be outside. I’ve been fortunate that I’ve been kind of been a floater, running a whole bunch of startups. So I’ve worked with the EMS companies, I’ve worked with component guys, I’ve worked with distributors, right? So if I have a pricing question, I’ll just call up Arrow or Avnet or one of those guys saying, “Hey, what do you think is a fair price for the part?” and they’ll tell me immediately. I don’t have to do detailed market analysis. It’s two calls and you’ll get your validation.

(53:32) Prakash: So on all that you laid out makes immense sense. The question I have though is that you’re trying to move this at a time when there are big distractions. One of them is AI and second is as it relates to AI, the chips that go into AI. Then you get into leading edge fabs that drive some of the volumes on these kind of chips. So how do you compare and contrast that versus 5nm, 7nm foundries, AI chips versus the strategy that you’re talking about?

(54:07) Madhu: No, like I said right at the beginning of the talk, uh you need a strategy for each vertical. We do need a foundry strategy. I’m not the expert on foundry, so I will desist from making any recommendations. My only point there is focus on everything from 300 nanometers to 40. Maybe 28, 22 because that’s where the bulk of the demand in India is. So if you need autonomy in this country, you better have the older node fabs. The leading edge fabs depends on what kind of a strategy you want, how much you think you will not face an embargo from say from Taiwan or something.

(54:45) Madhu: But what are you going to build in those leading edge fabs is the other question that you got to ask. So what is our AI/ML chip strategy going to be? Are we going to focus mostly on training and stuff and basically say that look, sorry, for training we can get from NVIDIA and stuff, inference is a huge market so inference chips is what India needs to build and let’s not worry too much about training. That’s an approach, I’m not saying it’s right or wrong, right? Then we need to have at least two, three companies doing inference chips, both at the lowest level, the mid-level and at the highest level.

(55:17) Madhu: The second question is we are building all these data centers like crazy that are coming in India. How many of those do you want to have local chips? Can we have Xeon competitors to in RISC-V. There’s no reason you can’t. But then, then you need to take a look at what workloads are they doing. Correct? So I’m a firm believer in having simpler, larger core-count chips. So which was the SPARC approach. So I don’t like too heavy a processor but that requires that you write a lot of multi-threaded software. It places a much bigger burden on the software guys. But it gives you far more throughput, it’s more energy-efficient, right? So we need to have a chat with the data center guys to figure out what workloads they are facing, what kind of chips they want. Because all the other mundane chips also get sold in a data center, right? The networking chips, the regular old multi-core, 16-core, 32-core, 64-core CPUs which can be done with RISC-V, they’ll be competitive with. Look, you will not reach the maturity of a Xeon or an IBM POWER anytime soon. But high-end RAS and all of that, right? You start from the bottom. You look at non-critical workloads, you look at cloud workloads which may not be, not exactly banking workloads and all that, right? So I’m part of a working group for the government which has been looking into that.

(56:47) Madhu: But you need to segment the problem and say that look, I want to do this, but more importantly, you need to say I don’t want to do this. It is far more important to decide what not to do than to decide what to do. You need to determine first what you don’t plan to do. Because otherwise that’s a distraction. Then your search space becomes much smaller, then you can prioritize. If you have not eliminated what you don’t want to do, then it’s kind of tough to move forward.

(57:16) Prakash: And that’s really important because when you consider volume and I completely agree with you, the 180nm, 65nm, the mature nodes essentially have so much more volume than the leading edge nodes. So if you want to drive volume, if that is your priority and build local ecosystem, then I agree, your approach of five segments, those segments what you highlighted make absolute sense.

(57:42) Madhu: Look, we can learn from the aerospace guys, right? Nobody designs a plane and an engine simultaneously. So if you’re trying to build a semiconductor ecosystem, you don’t want to experiment with leading nodes because then when you’re building a semiconductor product, you’re experimenting with the product definition as it is. You don’t know whether the product is going to succeed or not. Why do you want to add the burden of playing with a leading node also simultaneously? So you need some invariables. You need constants.

(58:11) Madhu: The reason languages like Rust, I just want to jump into software, functional program works so well because you say X and Y are constants, they are immutable. So you don’t have to reason about them. They are guaranteed to stay. You worry only about these three variables which change. So all your verification will touch only those three variables. The problem with C is anything can change under you. So if your entire substrate under you is unstable, your foundation is unstable, you go haywire. So human beings can deal only with X number of variables simultaneously. That’s how we are constructed, correct? Too much of choice is bad for us. Mutual funds is a classic example where it is supposed to make the problem easier, but we have more mutual funds and stocks now, right? So it kind of defeats the purpose. It’s easier to pick a stock than a mutual fund sometimes. Correct?

(59:04) Madhu: So in the semiconductor strategy also, don’t make everything a variable. You’re not going to bring us on par with Taiwan in a year. Okay? We go at our own pace. Stop looking elsewhere. Don’t compare yourself with China, Taiwan, whatever, right? It’s like just wear blinkers, set a strategy, believe in yourself. Aatmanirbharta is not just doing stuff locally, it’s believing in yourself. People miss that aspect of it. It’s faith in yourself. Right? The faith has to come first. The local products will come next. Right? So that belief in ourselves. See, there is a fine line between strong belief in yourself and arrogance. Right? So we need to figure that out. So you believe in yourself, you take a gamble. Don’t be hard on yourself. Don’t critique ourselves so much. As a country, we have this habit of self-flagellation. We are a nascent country. Of course, we’ll get a few things wrong. Ho gaya, what has happened has happened, ignore. Stop blaming people. Right? What do you do next? So even in semiconductor, don’t try to invent everything under the sun, right? Let’s look at the old mature nodes. Let’s let’s figure out 10, 20 chips that we can do. Because once you’ve got an ecosystem going, then the confidence will come. And you can build from there. Then you can build from there. That doesn’t mean that you ignore the high-end nodes, right? You have a few R&D programs where you will build 2nm chips for high-end training and inference. Keep that going. So there has to be a combination. It can’t be either-or. But where you have to put X amount of money, where you need to put Y amount of money, you got to decide.

(1:00:39) Prakash: Agree. And all of these, at least based on my experience, are long games, Madhu. Like 10 plus years, couple of decades game, right? All the guys who are right on top, whether it’s Silicon Valley, Taiwan or China, they have done this for like two, three decades consistently. So, yeah, you alluded to it but I thought for the audience, it would be important to understand that this is not a short-term game.

(1:01:06) Madhu: It’s not a short-term thing, right? And especially the senior folks in the industry, that of course includes me, need to let go of our ego. So if you’re building a wall, you should realize that in your lifetime, you’re going to build three layers of bricks. That is your job. You build those three layers and you let the next set of folks build the next three layers and it goes on. Right? You don’t be arrogant and saying that I’ve got this 30-year vision. No, you can’t have a 30-year vision. That’s nonsense. You should have a good grasp of what you can build, what you’re trying to build. You build that foundation and, and the design will keep changing. See, I think I wrote in LinkedIn saying that CEOs especially have this God complex and society forces that. We need to let go of that. What we need is a large dose of humility. And then things will happen.

(1:02:05) Prakash: So well said. And that also brings me to another question which I wanted to ask you for the aspiring founders or the current founders in the chip and deep tech domain that are listening in as part of the audience. You have shared so much about the chip and deep tech industry, the difficulties and sometimes it can be really daunting to build such companies, including the ones that you are building, InCore. So what advice would you have for current founders or aspiring founders who are interested to building chips and deep tech ecosystem for India?

(1:02:42) Madhu: Know your market well. That’s all, right? Really study the market, understand it. There is a danger there. If you’re too optimistic, you will overread the market. If you’re too pessimistic and people discourage you...So I’ll tell you for example, right, classical example. Commodity chips. Chips selling for 50 cents to a dollar and a half. Should a startup build one or not? What do you think? Right? There’s no easy answer. The standard answer is you can’t differentiate, the big guys will, because see, commodity chips are a cash flow problem. There’s nothing tech about it because a lot of people can build that chip. Everything from inventory to market fluctuation, to canceled orders, to time of payment, to receivables, these are all the things, right? It’s not for the faint of heart. But that doesn’t mean I discourage people, correct? So if you’re going to be in the commodity market, you need an angle which differentiates you. If you can find that, get into the commodity segment. But if you can’t find that angle, don’t get into the commodity segment.

(1:03:48) Madhu: See, people still open rice mandis. You can still go put a small booth and sell Fanta. It’ll still sell. Right? Business is business. You can always do business. Correct? You need to figure out how much it costs to fund, cash flow, whether you can make a break and all of that, right? Look, I closed down a lot of startups that I tried because I was a naive idiot. There’s no other way to put it. Thinking that unless I am perfect and I am the best in the world, a startup won’t succeed. That’s like absolute nonsense. So everything I did when I initially did startups, I wish I’d not done because I did a social media startup, we did a medical records management company, all of those could be, could have taken and become big companies. But building startups is just hard work here. It’s 99% hard work, right? The differentiation and all that fancy stuff is like 2 to 3% max, correct? It’s a lot and lot of hard work. That can be done. But you need the patience. But which also means that you need investors who will be patient with you. Right? That probably is a lacking commodity. See, a lot of businesses are good businesses worth investing in, but they may not necessarily be a VC investable. People unnecessarily, that’s one more group that is vilified unnecessarily. Right? Seems to be the trend for today. It’s like VCs have a particular business model. They expect a certain return. So if you fit within that model, they will fund you. So if you fit within that model, you’re VC investable. If you don’t fit in, doesn’t mean you’re a bad company. You simply don’t fit in with what they’re expecting. So if a VC rejects you, you part in good terms saying that look, we are on different trajectories in life. That’s all. End of story. That’s the same, right? It’s like we waste so much energy in blaming people. That’s like, it’s not funny.

(1:05:50) Prakash: So we are coming to the end of the show, Madhu. So I have a final question which I ask all my guests. The India’s journey on semiconductors and deep tech is not only about domestic growth, it is putting India on the global map on technology. So if you fast forward a couple of decades or so, what is your vision of India’s position in the technology world? And what needs to happen today in order for us to achieve that?

(1:06:23) Madhu: See, I’m a hard numbers guy, right? So for me, uh India probably needs to have 25% of the world’s market in semiconductors costing below $25. For me it’s a 25 by 25. One fourth of the market should be chips designed in India. Fabricated, all of that, I can’t figure out, but quarter of the world’s chips should come out of India. Below $25. Above that, kind of tough depends on how everything and goes, but in the higher end chips like servers and all of that, mobile phones and all that, I would like something like about 15% of the world’s market. In terms of value, I would aspire to about 20 to 30% of the revenue in the semiconductor world should come from India. Okay. I think that’s a fair... in keeping with our... Hamare aukaat ke bahar nahi hai, to put it in Hindi.

(1:07:21) Prakash: And what needs to happen? You talked a lot about what the strategy should be. Anything you missed in terms of what needs to happen today to achieve those goals?

(1:07:29) Madhu: Each of those segments like we said, right? We need to figure out local champions and then measure. So if I take an LCD television apart, I should say, look, next two years 20% localization. So the government has thought through all of this, right? PLI is also tied to PMP. But the PMP is lagging. So we need to crack the whip on PMP. Mobile phones, we are, we are what, we are shipping about 120, 150 million mobile phones a year. 90-95% of the components are imported. Look, take a bill of material on a mobile phone here. Ignore DRAM and flash. Other than that, why can’t all the other components be local? What prevents you from it? At least in the sub 10,000 rupee segment, we should be able to do. You will say yeah, modems take time to develop. Okay, license a modem. Fine. You can license modem tech, should be available. Other than that, everything else is doable. What is the part that you can’t do? You can’t do audio codecs?

(1:08:40) Madhu: So interestingly, you’ve seen Axero, right? You’ve heard of Axero?

(1:08:44) Prakash: No.

(1:08:45) Madhu: So the Murugappa Group, which has put the OSAT, went and bought the entire RF division of Renesas. Lock, stock and barrel including the CEO. Very interesting chap. I’ve talked to him. You should look at them. They’re nice. So now India is one of the world’s leading supplier of RF parts. To Nokia, to Ericsson and to Huawei. So Chinese telecom now runs on Indian chips. So I think they, they asked them to put an R&D unit in China also. I saw Axero had opened a design office or something in China. I’m pretty sure the Chinese are getting nervous and will try to swap us out and stuff. But as of today, India is one of the leading suppliers of RF chips to the world.

(1:09:31) Madhu: Yeah. So one of the things that Indian companies need to do is a lot of distress in the semicon industry around the world, right? We should be grabbing companies left, right and center. I have sent two, three proposals to the government also. There are a lot of fire sales going on. This is the right time to pick up IP.

(1:09:46) Prakash: In fact, interesting you say that because just in today morning’s Mint, there’s an article about how Indian companies could seek out as a part of the chip ecosystem development exactly what you’re saying. IP around the world and why don’t we invest in them?

(1:10:06) Madhu: Look here, it’s like, see, ultimately you’re either a semicon guy or not. If I look at a nice chip, preferably an InCore IP chip, but third party is okay, when you, when you look at a printed circuit board and you run your hands on the chip, there is a deep sense of satisfaction. Look, at what we have created in this industry. We pack in trillions of electrons and create a virtual universe, all from grains of sand. If that miracle doesn’t give you spiritual satisfaction of some kind, you are dead inside, man.

(1:10:44) Prakash: Yeah. 100% agree. 100% agree. As someone who has spent pretty much my entire life in silicon, there is no better industry to be. It’s one of the most fascinating and magical things invented by humans.

(1:11:00) Madhu: It’s as close to magic as you can get and I’m thrilled I was given the opportunity and absolutely no regrets. It’s been a wonderful journey. So there’s been no downsides. Little things, yeah, revenue going up, down, difficult customers. Those are all trivial things, right? You need to, at least at a certain level of maturity, you need to figure out what should bother you and what should not. Otherwise, you let the little things bother you, you’ll never make progress.

(1:11:34) Madhu: The only thing I would say is the veterans in the industry need to speak up more just to provide support. That includes me. I’m including myself also. I think the veterans need to support the industry more, talk a little more, do something more concrete because there is still a bit of a crisis of confidence. I still see startups sinking. Startups with good products. There’s no business to sink. We kind of need to go out of our way to help them. I think that can be done. Look, it’s, it’s always think big and implement small, correct? I think we’ve done enough of the big thinking. At some point of time, well, I have a bit of an OCD also. So for me, the details matter, right? You sweat out the details, everything else takes care here. So it’s like big, inspiring words and all of that is fine. Sweat the details out and the rest will take care of itself.

(1:22:33) Prakash: Very well said and that’s one of the reasons why in a small way I want to contribute to the semiconductor and deep tech industry here, Madhu. The reason why I started this podcast is to bring a voice into the industry, right? What, what people think and what founders like you have built and are continuing to build. It’s such an amazing place and more people need to hear the stories and ideas about what we can do to build the India’s ecosystem.

(1:22:59) Prakash: Thank you Madhu and for our audience, please tune in to whichever channels you listen or watch our Chai & Chips episodes. Please do give us feedback on how I can do better, what kind of topics you would like to listen to and what areas are really piquing your interest. Thank you once again.

Guest: Manish Singhal - Founding Partner of pi Ventures

Episode Summary:

Is India on the verge of becoming a global Deep Tech powerhouse? What will it take to get there?

In our latest Chai & Chips episode, I sit down with Manish Singhal, Founding Partner of pi Ventures, one of India's pioneering Deep Tech VCs, to unpack this very question. His journey from a hands-on engineer to a leading investor provides a uniquely grounded perspective on the ecosystem.

This is a must-listen for anyone building or investing in the future of technology in India.

YouTube episode link:

Key Insights:

In this conversation on "Chai & Chips," I sat down with Manish Singhal, a technologist, entrepreneur, and the founding partner of Pi Ventures, one of India's first Deep Tech-focused venture capital funds. The discussion offered a pragmatic yet optimistic deep dive into the evolution, challenges, and immense potential of India's Deep Tech ecosystem. Here are the key insights and takeaways from their dialogue.

1. The Evolution of Deep Tech in India: From Scary to Mainstream

Manish paints a vivid picture of Deep Tech’s journey in India, framing it as an "evolution curve." Just a few years ago, in 2015, "Deep Tech" was a scary and misunderstood term. Today, it’s a mainstream buzzword. This shift is not just semantic; it reflects a growing maturity in the ecosystem, fuelled by a crucial tailwind: government support. Manish highlights the symbiotic relationship between defence and Deep Tech, noting that a nation’s defence needs often drive its most advanced technological innovations. The Indian government's increasing focus on opening up defence grants and promoting indigenous technology through initiatives like Atmanirbhar Bharat is creating a powerful inflection point for the entire sector.

2. The Current Innovation Landscape: A Startup-Led Revolution

A critical observation from Manish is that at present, genuine innovation in India is overwhelmingly driven by startups. While government research bodies like ISRO and DRDO contribute significantly, particularly in defence, large Indian corporations have been slow to innovate, often preferring to acquire companies abroad rather than fostering domestic R&D. This leaves a vast, untapped potential for corporate-startup collaboration. The good news however, is that for a quality Deep Tech startup with a strong idea and team, funding is no longer the bottleneck it once was. Private capital is available and actively seeking meaningful opportunities.

3. Government's Role: Simplify, Foster, and Get Out of the Way

While acknowledging the positive intent behind government policies, Manish offers a candid critique of their execution. He points to "leakage" and delays—such as grants taking years to reach a startup—as major hurdles. His prescription for the government is threefold:

• Foster Grassroots Innovation: Instead of focusing solely on large-scale projects, the government should nurture the base of the innovation pyramid. This means more accessible "mini-grants" (e.g., ₹10-15 lakhs), creating effective "tinker houses" in universities, and supporting more business-oriented PhD research.

• Simplify Everything: The biggest impediment to growth is "red tape." The complexity of running a company in India, from navigating angel tax to basic compliance, pushes many founders to headquarter their companies abroad, leading to a "leakage" of valuable IP and future exits. Simplifying day-to-day business operations is paramount.

• Define Roles Clearly: The government's strength lies in providing catalytic capital through grants and soft loans, not in making equity investments. Equity funding, Manish argues, should be left to private venture funds, which are better equipped to manage the risk and drive commercial success.

4. The Future is Deep and Global

Manish holds a deeply optimistic vision for India's future, predicting that within a decade, India will be "absolutely in the center of the Deep Tech map of the world." This isn't just wishful thinking. He argues that post-COVID, geographical boundaries have blurred. An Indian startup is no longer just an Indian startup; it is a global company from day one. The problems they solve are global, their customers are global, and their talent competes on a global stage. This global mindset is essential for the next phase of growth.

5. Advice for Deep Tech Founders: The Duality of Passion and Pragmatism

For aspiring Deep Tech entrepreneurs, Manish’s advice is nuanced yet powerful. He emphasizes the need to embody two contradictory thoughts simultaneously:

• Be deeply in love with your technology: You must have an unshakable belief in and a profound understanding of your innovation.

• Be able to step away from it: You must detach yourself enough to ask the hard business questions. Who needs this? Does it create a 10x disruptive difference or just an incremental improvement?

The most successful founders are those who can transition from a "technology narrative" to a "business narrative" early in their journey. Instead of building a technology and then searching for a use case, they start with a clear understanding of the market need and build a solution for it. As exemplified by portfolio companies like Agnikul (3D printed rockets), the "who cares?" question must be answered with a compelling vision of how the technology enables a new, better, or more accessible future.

In conclusion, Manish Singhal's insights reveal an Indian Deep Tech ecosystem at a pivotal moment. The raw ingredients—talent, ideas, and capital—are increasingly in place. The path forward requires a concerted effort to simplify the operating environment, foster innovation from the ground up, and empower founders to think globally, ensuring that India's "deep" future is not just a possibility, but an inevitability.

Connect with our Guest:

• pi Ventures: https://www.piventures.in/

• Manish Singhal on LinkedIn: Manish Singhal | LinkedIn

• Manish Singhal on X: Manish Singhal (@manish_saarthi) / X

Follow Chai and Chips:

• Subscribe on YouTube(Chai & Chips - YouTube), Spotify(Chai & Chips Podcast | Podcast on Spotify), Apple Podcasts(Chai & Chips Podcast - Podcast - Apple Podcasts) or your favourite podcast platform to never miss an episode.

• Leave a review—it helps us reach more listeners!

• Follow Prakash on LinkedIn(Prakash Mallya | LinkedIn) and X(Prakash Mallya (@PrakashMallya) / X) for updates.

Episode Transcript

Speakers:

• Manish Singhal (Guest)

• Prakash Mallya (Host)

(00:04) Manish: It helps to sometimes see a country's macro over a 10-year period, right? So right now we are talking about 2025.Today Deep Tech is not a scary word. In fact, everybody is singing Deep Tech, whether you understand technology or not. 2015 it was a scary word. 2005 it was not even known. Right? So it's an evolution curve.

(00:31) Manish: Defence and Deep Tech typically go hand in hand. Now you can see how much, how much emphasis government is putting in opening up defence grants for Deep Tech companies. So we are now at an inflection point.

(00:44) Manish: Currently, Prakash, and I could be wrong, my belief is that only startups innovate in India. Government sector does some part in ISRO, DRDO etc. Of course, they do that for the defence. But big companies don't innovate in India.

(00:1:01) Manish: It's changing. It was very hard two years back. But we have seen now, uh, if you have a good idea, good founding team, etc., like very few companies have not been able to raise the money that they needed.

(01:22) Prakash: Hi viewers, welcome to Chai & Chips, and this is Prakash Mallya. We have with us today Manish Singhal, the founder of a Deep Tech venture fund, Pi Ventures, one of the first few that started in India. He's a technologist, an entrepreneur and a venture capitalist. He has had success in variety of different fields. We'll talk about it. He's also started Let's Venture, which was a marketplace which helped Indian investors as well as early-stage startups towards building a very strong ecosystem in venture. And he's also a wildlife photographer, which we will talk less of, but it explains the diversity of things he has done. So welcome to the show, Manish. Great to have you.

(02:10) Manish: Thank you so much Prakash. Pleasure to be here.

(02:13) Prakash: Likewise, likewise. It's been a while. Hope you're doing well.

(02:17) Manish: Yes, yes. Hope the same for you.

(02:20) Prakash: Yes, indeed. Thank you. So let me start with your journey, right? You've been in Deep Tech for a bit now, but what made you, Manish, take on this highly complex and very difficult space versus many other opportunities, especially like software services that India is very well known for to pursue that?

(02:45) Manish: I think, two probably reasons, right? One is my own journey. So for the good or the bad, for almost 20 plus years when I was working as an engineer, I happened to actually end up working in the team within that overall team in the hardest tech that we were trying to sort of unravel at various points of time. So, in some sense in my, all my developing journey, my work was always on the cutting edge of technology. Right? Be it in Motorola days, Tata Elxsi, Ittiam Systems and later on Sling, right? So we built cutting edge products in those times. And that trained the DNA in a different way, right? It trained me to look at newer technologies with a different lens. It's also trained me to look at how these technologies can actually make a big outcome for businesses, right? Not just from a tech standpoint. So that, that was almost 20 years of working in the trenches that led to a belief that, you know, technology is what will create a future, right? And very strong belief. And when I left my startups and then started, sort of not having a plan, just sort of advising startups and working with them, I realized that hardly anybody is able to actually back a fundamentally different technology when they were starting. This is 2011, '12. And everybody in those days was going on e-commerce and things like that. And this good tech startups were not able to get their initial seed capital as well just to get moving. And the reason for that is essentially investors are not able to put two and two together, right? Technology looks scary to them. They're not able to see the business side of it, long gestation period possibly. Not happening. So that sort of led to a role where I felt, you know, these companies need money and I could support them. Second thing is my own inability to do anything else. So these are the two reasons.

(05:07) Prakash: And you think the inability of investors to see the picture in technology startups, is it unique to India or you feel it exists even outside of India?

(05:20) Manish: I think it's a evolution curve, right? It helps to sometimes see a country's macro over a 10 year period, right? So right now we are talking about 2025. Today Deep Tech is not a scary word. In fact, everybody is singing Deep Tech, whether you understand technology or not. 2015 it was a scary word. 2005 it was not even known. Right? So it's an evolution curve. I think one thing I would say is slightly different than in other countries. See, India has will find its own path. If we keep comparing ourselves to other countries, I think fundamentally we will not do right thing for how to grow India based on its strength. Defence and Deep Tech typically go hand in hand. Now you can see how much how much emphasis government is putting in opening up defence grants for Deep Tech companies. So we are now at an inflection point where in 10 years later in 2025, if we happen to be talking, this conversation will not be meaningful because there's no difference in Deep Tech, right? I think it'll be very, very par for the course. So in my opinion it's a evolutionary curve of any country.

(06:47) Prakash: And you think defence and Deep Tech being similar is going to happen over time, or you feel the convergence has already happened?

(06:59) Manish: They work with each other. Defence drives the Deep Tech, right? It's not that they are similar. Most of the technologies that defence needs to be ahead of the curve drives the Deep Tech ecosystem of any country, right? Defence typically becomes the first buyer of something fundamentally different, right? And then they have grant structure, etc to promote innovation. Right? So essentially that's the synergy between them. If your defence is not forward looking, then it's hard to incubate a Deep Tech ecosystem in a country.

(07:39) Prakash: So, let me wind the clock back to where you started, right, or close to where you started, and we met at that time as well. Your fund was an AI focused fund. And now if I look at your website and the portfolio you have, it is alternative protein, 3D printed rocket, very cool company, Agnikul. You have fast charging batteries, cryptocurrencies and what not. So what binds all of these portfolio companies together? What is the broad theme? And has your investment thesis, has it related to that changed or evolved?

(08:24) Manish: Yes, it has evolved. I think what you see is our own journey. Back in 2016 when we started, we felt AI will change the world. And therefore went headlong into AI when AI was very early in the market, right? And as we went along making those investments, we realized that these are not just AI investments. They are disruptive AI investments, means they have built a technology which is non-trivial, right, within AI as well. So step by step we discovered who we are, right? So we actually slowly discovered that we are not an AI fund, we are a disruptive AI fund. Then in 2018, '19, I don't know when, but something struck me and, you know, I don't know what experience, but suddenly I sort of felt that material science will change the world. Just like AI is changing the world, material science will change the world in the few years, right? And then we started looking at physical innovations. By the time the fund two came along, which is 2022, I think we were, we were quite clear in what our thesis is. It's essentially looking at disruptive technologies which can provide 10x edge to the businesses. And the technologies that we focus in and back will be a function of time. Right? So in 2016, '17, '18, AI was on the cutting edge of disruption. Today, we believe AI has gone into the incremental tech and not cutting edge anymore. Two years back, we didn't feel quantum, it was too sciencey. But now we feel it is on the cutting edge. In the few years, we should see commercialization of quantum, right? So that's how the evolution of Pi has happened that we are essentially a disruptive technology backer, but the technologies that we will focus on will be a function of time.

(10:32) Prakash: In fact, your website has bunch of great blogs, research and evolution of technologies, exactly what you mentioned on a two by two matrix, which I thought was very, very good. And it tells you as you have invested how the industry segments as well as technologies have evolved. So agree with you. It's a very, very good, summary. At the same time, when you look at the evolution of Pi Ventures, normally most of the funds in Deep Tech, including pi Ventures, I would agree that would invest in technologies of the future, take a bet on it. So do you believe in India, the way you look at it at this point in time, there are spaces or segments which are uniquely good for Indian startup founders to work in Deep Tech or semiconductor area where they can make a deep impact?

(11:32) Manish: Especially after COVID, we are not divided so much by boundaries on the map. We sort of live in a global world and a global economy. Problem statements have become common across the globe. People are willing to buy from anywhere in the world. People are willing to pay you anywhere in the world. With that globalization, the dialogue of what Indian startups can do versus US startups can do has lost its meaning. I believe we can do whatever it takes to do and whatever needs to be done for the better of the world, right? We have seen lot of innovations at the cutting edge, at the microprocessor level, high performance computing level, quantum computing, space tech is heating up in India because of support, etc. from the government as well. Material science is really heating up in terms of alternative proteins and other alternative materials. Battery tech, we get so many companies from battery tech, right? I would flip the question. I would say tell me a space in which we are not working in India, right? It'll be hard to find.

(12:53) Prakash: Oh, really? Oh, that's good to know. And do you think the Atmanirbhar Bharat or self-reliant India that is a strong initiative government has driven over past several years, has something to do with the depth and breadth of innovations you are seeing in the Deep Tech space?

(13:12) Manish: Yes and no, Prakash. I think positive side is government is waking up to what technology innovations can be done and how can we be more self-reliant. Geopolitics is such that countries, other countries are also looking at India as a China plus one strategy, right? So there are some tailwinds that help us. Unfortunately in India, just like any other government policy, what comes from the boardroom to out on the trenches, there's a lot of leakage or delay. So, yes, it has helped in some way, but have we done the best out of that initiative? I would say no, just like any other leakage in our country. Not our all our taxes go back to us in a positive way. Similarly all these initiatives have a lot of loss in the entire value chain. If we can minimize that loss, you will see an uplift of this country like nobody else.

(14:17) Prakash: So what are one or two or three things you would suggest as ways to stem it and make it more impactful?

(14:29) Manish: The initiatives from the government, did you mean that? I think positive side is good initiatives, right? I've seen some really good quantum mission, very good initiative. There is a talk of iDEX, iDEX grants, fantastic initiative, right? We need to think about it in two different segments, I believe so, right? One is can we foster more innovation? Right? Not think about how we scale innovation, we think about fundamentally fostering innovation. Why that is important is, if we have more experiments going in the ground, there will be a natural failure rate, but more companies which have mettle will come up. Today there is no dearth of funding in this country. If you are doing something meaningful, you will be able to raise money and move forward, right? Without support from government, I'm saying. Government can support, but I'm saying that let us say that government, no support, even then if you are doing something meaningful, you will raise private money. Money is available. We have to increase the base of this innovation. How do we do that? I think we need to create lot more business-oriented research in universities. We need to create literally tinker houses which are effective across these universities where startups can go, utilize some of their infrastructure, work on their idea, move forward. We need to create mini grant structure rather than big grant structure, right? 10 lakhs, 15 lakhs should be easy for them to get to do experiments rather than thinking about a crore or two crore. So I am saying that if as a government we address the grassroots level innovation more than the scale innovation as a first piece, I think we will leap forward. Then you come at the scale innovation because if you are looking at the grassroots innovation, let's say you're doing 10x there, I think private funding will take the scale and you will not miss that bus. You can do always do more there, but can we address the grassroots in a more effective way? And of course, cut down the red tape. I think red tape kills us, right? Our policies sometimes are positive, sometimes are retrograde. I have seen companies where they've got grants from technology boards, etc. but it takes a year, two years to get that money in the company. Year or two year is a very long time for a startup journey, right? Founders still want to register their company abroad rather than India because the red tape in India is so hard for the managing an India headquarter company has its own overheads. So we are leaking IP. We are somewhere leaking exits as well. With some of these listings becomes easy, some of these companies are now flipping back, which is you know, good thing to see. So there is some change in the mix. But if we can just do some of these basic things right, we don't have to do something out of the world. We got to do our basic day-to-day stuff right and with more efficiency, I think we will be a different country altogether.

(17:53) Prakash: I think the foundation can play such a big role in broader innovation or scale innovation at a later stage. And a related question in that space, especially when it comes to Deep Tech, the innovation cycles are long, patient capital is required, supply chains are very complex. And US is one of the countries I've observed, has done pretty well, based on history in terms of investing or shaping through R&D the markets. So you would look at search or you would look at GPS or several other technologies including outside of tech, even in the healthcare space have been driven by US government's R&D. So when you look at India in that context, what are the kind of things versus the government as compared to a VC where funding cycles are shorter, you could collaborate on to make a bigger impact in the Deep Tech space.

(18:55) Manish: I think am of the view that government should not get involved in equity funding. Now, this is a controversial view, not subscribed by many. But I think that changes the entire equation of how things happen. I'm more of a view of that these, this money should be made available for grants or in certain cases and there can be various categories of grant. Like innovation grant comes as a grant, you burn that money, you don't owe anything back. A scale grant could come as a soft loan without collateral with some payment terms which are easy for startups to manage, right? So there are various ways to manage that capital. If we can address some of those, like, and and I should say that there are already some of these things happening, like iDEX has a matching grant. There is a big grant by that, you know, BIRAC does, etc. Some of this is there here and there. But essentially if we if we leave the equity funding to private venture funds, but do alterative capital funding in these forms, in a way, I think that would be a better win-win scenario for the private investors, government and the founders. Some of it is happening, not enough and not in enough structured.

(20:34) Prakash: The model you're suggesting does it help bridge some of the R&D intensity issues we have had, right? So 0.7% of GDP is spent on R&D, very low. So the model structure of, uh, equity investment being VC led and kind of creative grants being government led is a model that can help that R&D intensity to go up.

(21:01) Manish: I think definitely for startups it will help. I think the additional things that help is how can we tap into corporates in a more effective way, right? There is literally no incentive for companies in India to buy another companies, right? In fact, some of the big corporates go and buy companies outside India, right? We keep hearing those news. Can we create an incentive structure, tax breaks, to buy technology within India, right? Then this whole piece will move much faster, right? We, we have a problem of angel tax. It should be the reverse, right? You should get a benefit for investing in technology rather than being taxed for it. So, some of those things can help to flywheel the R&D part, right? So currently Prakash, and I could be wrong, my belief is that only startups innovate in India. Government sector does some part in ISRO, DRDO, etc. Of course, they do that for the defence. But big companies don't innovate in India. That contribution of theirs to the innovation is very low comparatively speaking and I think that part needs to be addressed somehow.

(22:21) Prakash: Yeah, in fact, we just spoke with Dr. Anandkumar who runs a drug research company out of India, Bugworks, and he was pretty much summarizing in a different way the same thing what you're mentioning, which means even the acquisitions, even the cash infusion from large companies into startups within India is not a lot. It can go up.

(22:48) Manish: It's not a lot.

(22:49) Prakash: Yeah. So which is also a function of innovation that they are driving within or R&D that they are driving within. And do you think the Anusandhan National Research Foundation, the grant of 1 lakh crores will change it or what do you believe could be the upside of a grant like that?

(23:12) Manish: It has some good structure. It will come down to execution. Right? Are we making it available for the right causes? Are we funding enough PhDs which are commercial oriented? I think that's where we lose our game, right? The government policies typically, these initiatives are all well meaning and well positioned, most of them, but poorly executed on ground, right? That's where we lose it. So if we can execute it, yeah, it will definitely help.

(23:44) Prakash: So from that point of view, venture capital companies or funds like yourself, what role do you believe they should be playing? Is it just focused on startups and helping founders to make the industry connection, product market fit, or you should also be focused on government policy, engagements with the government to make sure that we are all marching in the same direction?

(24:17) Manish: I think, again, I will probably say something which is sort of controversial if you were, but fundamental aim of a venture capital investor is to invest money. Period. The help that we end up doing to our founders is accidental and should be accidental, right? It will separate some good venture funds from the others if you are able to help or not help. But what do we fundamentally exist for? We fundamentally exist for making investments and harvesting returns and making money for our investors and in the process, according to your thesis, progress that thesis. If you are a Deep Tech fund, let's push the envelope on the Deep Tech. If you're a consumer fund, let's push the envelope on the brands, right? All these funds are required with different focuses. That's what funds should focus on. Whether fund should get involved in policy decision making, funds are already involved in consultations, right? I have been on meetings where government has been inviting some of us to talk to. And there is representation from IVCA as well in different forums, right? So I think beyond that, funds getting involved deeper in policy making will be hard because you're busy in your day job, number one job, right? You can't take out that much time. You can provide consultation, you can provide feedback, but you can't own those things. What would be good to see is to see if some people from the venture industry once they retire from their day job, if they're willing to go and join the government and do some things for them in this sector and government welcomes them, I think that will be very useful because folks from this industry will bring all that experience which can help this.

(26:13) Prakash: Your fund and your commitment to your stakeholders who have supported you with the fund is your primary objective and it does take a lot of work. Yeah.

(26:25) Prakash: So let me take a quick segue into a set of quick questions or a rapid fire session with you, Manish, just to make it a bit more fun. And we can come back to asking you different things about venture and Deep Tech. Is that okay with you?

(26:41) Manish: I'll do my best.

(26:42) Prakash: Okay. So the first question, the most underrated technology in chips and Deep Tech.

(26:52) Manish: I think different substrates for chip technologies.

(27:00) Prakash: Okay.

(27:01) Manish: And, I think, okay, it's a quick fire, but I have to say that material science is often ignored, but just like AI forms your sort of an almost like an underlying theme in the new age software, right? Material science forms that underlying theme of innovation for all physical startups. So I would actually, sort of say, if I have to say one word, it's not a direct answer, but material science is the real answer in my head for that question.

(27:35) Prakash: Yeah, good point. Especially going to be transformed, I feel, with AI, the possibility of materials.

(27:46) Prakash: Best kind of risk to take?

(27:47) Manish: Best kind of risk is that it should, I mean, it should not feel like a risk. That's the best kind of risk to take.

(27:57) Prakash: But one know whether it's in hindsight or as you take it.

(28:02) Manish: I think,as you take it, if you're so excited about, I'm again talking in context of venture capital here, right? So what is the context here? Let's say I'm investing in a company which feels very risky, right? To my mind. Or it's a very cutting-edge technology, unproven. If my conviction is super high and my excitement for that is super high, it will not feel like a risk. It's like a founder launching a startup. It's hard. That's a risk that a founder is taking, but they're not taking it thinking it's a risk. They're seeing the opportunity part of it. That's what I mean that it should be a risk that it doesn't feel like a risk. It should be, oh wow, let's do this.

(28:51) Prakash: A walk in the park. Yeah.

(28:54) Prakash: One word to describe India's Deep Tech future.

(28:58) Manish: Deep.

(29:02) Prakash: Good one. CPU or GPU for the future?

(29:07) Manish: I don't think there is one answer to this. I think there is a lot more to this. Both will exist depending upon different applications and some more alternative high-performance architectures will come. They are coming, which will be suitable. So I think probably five years later you will be asking choose between the next five, right? CPU, GPU, accelerator of this kind, optical compute, quantum compute, I don't know. There will be so many things are coming come up and each will serve a distinct need in a very distinct way.

(29:43) Prakash: Good answer. Global market first or India market first?

(29:47) Manish: There are no boundaries in the world anymore. It's always global. India is part of the globe.

(29:52) Prakash: Okay, so let's get back to talking Deep Tech.

(29:56) Manish: Alright.

(29:57) Prakash: So, one of the observations and data backs it as well is India has a very large pool of semiconductor design talent, right? One in five, 20% or so resides in India. But when you look at investible opportunities in the chip design space, it is less as compared to the opportunity that India provides. And obviously it can get better. So when you look from a venture fund point of view, investing in semiconductor, what are the most interesting options for you? Is it like materials you talked about? Is it design? Is it fabrication? Is it all or some?

(30:39) Manish: It could be one of them or multiple of them. So let me unpack three, four observations in this question. First observation is, we have to factor in the evolution. 10 years back you would ask the same question in product startups. We have so many GCCs, so many software engineers, why are we not launching enough product startups?

(31:05) Prakash: Right.

(31:06) Manish: What is the difference in that question and this question? It's the same question, just 10 years apart. I don't think you will be asking me this question 10 years later. It's just an evolution. And the evolution is that multinationals have done a great job in training our engineering force which unfortunately our universities don't do well. And they, some of them then take the plunge and become entrepreneurs. Right? And then then that system grows. We are seeing that evolution in semiconductor in the last five years. So there are innovations happening on materials, alternative materials, there is happening on alternative architectures of computing. There are innovations happening on making your own sort of ASICs for different applications in IoT, etc. So there are innovations happening in all the directions, right? Now, what we will invest in is not sort of direction led, but value led. What I mean by that is if we can find irrespective of which dimension this is, either it's a computing architecture or an alternative chemistry or alternative substrates or a different sort of an ASIC for different application, I think fundamentally we will look at, okay, whatever you're doing, is it making a 10x difference to what is out there? In in the old framework we have, we call it new product in an old market. Is it really that disruptive that people are going to move from their solutions and take you? If that equation is answered well, we will do it. So we backed two semiconductor companies. One is Quanfluence, which is making a quantum computer using light. But before they get to computer, quantum computer, they have something called an Ising machine, which is a very smart innovation between classical compute and optical compute, and it can actually run several NP-hard problems in a much more efficient way than classical computers. So it's a nice technology sitting in the chasm before quantum computing comes mainstream. So we felt that okay, there is a some fit over there, right, in terms of market and need. We've also backed Lightspeed Photonics which essentially makes transceivers for data to optical connect, which are very small, really tiny, power point and form factor wise. And therefore, they can be used to make better QSFPs or so many other interconnects which are required for the photonic interconnects, right? So, there also we felt that the timing is right for such an innovation where data centers are heating up, they need better heat, power equations on their connectors, etc, right? So, it really depends upon where this 10x value we can see on the existing problem.

(34:22) Prakash: One specific thing I wanted to deep dive on when it comes to semiconductor opportunities in India, Manish, and last few years have been just an insane breakneck speed of AI and compute as it relates to AI, right? So when you look at opportunities like AI, given chip design talent is so pervasive in India, do you believe there are interesting opportunities in the edge AI space or accelerator space or any such technology that can be built in India, designed in India and manufactured potentially in India and for the world?

(35:04) Manish: No doubt about that, right? So we have actually met companies in the various things you outlined, edge compute, high-performance compute. We've actually met quite a few companies which are taking different parts to high-performance compute, different architectures, etc. And all these are now getting done in India, right? From a design perspective, implementation perspective. Now realization I don't know because it is, we don't still have the foundries to the level we want. So that that's probably a function of time, but the other part of design and getting it done architecturally is being done here.

(35:48) Prakash: One part, obviously makes it difficult for semiconductor startups is just the ticket sizes of chip design, especially in AI, is just gone up. In general, the chip design, quantum of money needed to design a chip has been going up significantly given the node, the new technology needed to build on it is also very expensive. So you think the ticket sizes of venture funds as well as grants from the government can support such chip design products or projects, sorry in India?

(36:24) Manish: It's changing. It was very hard two years back, but we have seen now, if you have a good idea, good founding team, etc., very few companies have not been able to raise the money that they need. And then there is DLI scheme as well. I think it's called DLI only, where the government supports, right? So I think semiconductor is on an evolutionary curve, right? We are on the right curve. As with anything, we can accelerate our curves, and that's where I think we can probably do some work, but we are not on a downward curve. We are on an upward curve.

(37:09) Prakash: So switching gears a bit on the audience listening in, right? Many of them would be entrepreneurs, focused on Deep Tech, including semiconductors. So, what according to you are the must-have qualities for an entrepreneur in this space that a Deep Tech venture fund founder like you will stand up and pay attention to?

(37:39) Manish: I think, couple of things maybe, right? As an observation, one is how much are you in love with your own technology and how much can you separate from it? Contradictory thoughts, but very important, right? So, first part of it means that how well you understand your innovation, how deeply you believe in it, etc. At the same time, the second thought is important. Can you step away from it and see whether it is needed in the world? And to whom it will make a difference. Will it make an incremental difference to somebody's life or will it make a disruptive difference, what we call as a 10x difference to somebody's life, right? If founder can carry these two contradictory thoughts in their mind and still have the energy to go 100 miles an hour every day, then you got a Deep Tech founder.

(38:42) Prakash: So will that also be your advice to a graduate coming out of a college in India or an early stage entrepreneur in Deep Tech on what they need to do to be successful in this space?

(38:56) Manish: Absolutely. I think that is important. And if it is sounding too sort of difficult to follow, I would say that build a business narrative for your technology, right? And we have seen that founders who are able to transition from a technology narrative to a business narrative in their early part of their journey, right, they would probably build a more customer-centric Deep Tech startup rather than otherwise. Else what you get is you build a technology, then you're looking for a use case. That is not an optimal journey for a Deep Tech founder.

(39:32) Prakash: Do you have one or two examples you can share where people have done it really well to bring it to life for our audience?

(39:41) Manish: Of course, I think most of our founders have done it. For example, Agnikul is one scaled company that we can see today, right? When we first met them, it was all about 3D printed rocket engines, right? That's the technology innovation. And you could say, who cares?

(40:03) Manish: But who cares answer is that okay, if you can do this, then you can build smaller rockets. And if you can build smaller rockets, smaller payloads can go to space on their terms, which today they are on a mercy of right share. I think this narrative was very clear in Srinath's and Moin's mind when they talked to us. So, that insight was very important for them also and for us also to back them, right? So yeah, that's one example maybe.

(40:38) Prakash: Look forward to having Agnikul founders on this show also at some stage.

(40:42) Manish: Yes, absolutely. You should reach out to them.

(40:45) Prakash: We come to the last question, Manish, that I plan to ask all the guests, which is as follows. The Deep Tech journey for India is not only domestic growth. And you talked a bit about it. The world is our oyster. So, it is India's position or vantage point in the global map of Deep Tech. So, when I ask you the question 15, 20 years from now, what is your vision of India's place in the Deep Tech or semiconductor map and what we need to do today to make that vision a reality?

(41:23) Manish: I have actually no doubt in my head or in my mind that India will be absolutely in the center of the Deep Tech map of the world in a decade from now. Whether it happens in five years, 10 years, 15 years, that we can debate. But today when you talk about Deep Tech, first country comes to your mind is US, maybe Israel, maybe China, right? India doesn't come today. I think it will be right there in the middle of it. So that's what I believe we hold as a potential, the entire ecosystem that is evolving and developing and taking roots. What can we do differently to accelerate it? I think quite a bit is happening. I can see a lot more tailwind in the last one year on Deep Tech than it was before. Almost every venture fund is now sort of venturing into harder technologies. Defence is opened up quite a bit. And I've said this before, defence and Deep Tech go hand in hand in most countries. So that is very critical piece. What we need to do is to simplify, and this is a broken record, right? It's a broken record. Everybody keeps saying that. Things are just difficult to do in India, right? It's difficult to get a driving license. It's now it's becomes slightly easier to get a passport done, right? But just basic needs of something, it's difficult to get from home to office. That's why we are chatting on Zoom, right? Our basic things, day-to-day things are difficult to do in India. Can we make them easy? Can we make them so easy that founders first choice is actually to headquarter a company in India rather than US? Can we make it easy for angel investors to invest in companies and get benefit from it rather than getting taxed for it? Can we do simple things right? That's all we need to do.

(43:32) Prakash: Great set of observations and recommendations. So, Manish, we have come to the end of the show. Is there anything that we haven't covered that you think we should?

(43:46) Manish: I think sorted. Yep.

(43:49) Prakash: Okay. So thank you for your time, Manish. I know you're very, very busy. So very, very appreciative of you taking the time to be on the show.

(43:59) Manish: Thank you Prakash. Thank you so much.

(44:01) Prakash: Thank you. And for our viewers, please subscribe to our Chai & Chips channel, whichever channel you watch it on. Please give us feedback on how we can do better, what kind of topics you want to listen to, who you want on the show. Look forward to listening from you. Thank you.

Episode Summary:

How does a successful semiconductor executive, who helped shape India's chip design ecosystem, end up on the front lines of a global health crisis? In this episode, Prakash sits down with Dr. Anand Anandkumar, a former chip designer turned biotech pioneer.

Dr. Anand shares his extraordinary journey from the world of transistors and silicon to developing new drugs against the world's deadliest, drug-resistant "superbugs." He reveals the deeply personal story—including his own battle with cancer—that fuelled his pivot and gave him an unwavering resolve to solve problems that matter on a global scale.

YouTube episode link:

Key Insights:

This podcast episode with Dr. Anand Kumar of Bugworks is a deep dive into the fight against antimicrobial resistance (AMR), the future of drug discovery in India, and the profound personal motivations that drive innovation.

1. The Global Crisis of Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR):

• The "Silent Pandemic": AMR is a growing global health crisis. Misuse and overuse of antibiotics (often bought "like candy") are rendering them ineffective, creating untreatable "superbugs."

• A Misunderstood Problem: Dr. Anand highlights that 60-70% of common infections are viral, not bacterial, meaning antibiotics are often taken unnecessarily, which accelerates resistance.

• Staggering Human Cost: India alone loses an estimated 400,000-500,000 people per year to infections that can no longer be treated by existing antibiotics.

• The Economic Challenge: Big Pharma has largely abandoned new antibiotic R&D because it's not profitable. Unlike a cholesterol drug taken for life, a new antibiotic must be used sparingly to prevent resistance, creating a difficult business model. This has led to a dangerous innovation gap.

2. Dr. Anand's Personal Journey & Motivation:

• The Pivot from Chips to Cells: Dr. Anand began his career as a semiconductor and chip designer. His transition into biotech was sparked by a brainstorming session where the idea of applying modeling and simulation from electronics to biology was born.

• A Purpose Forged by Fire: His own serious health challenges, including being a cancer survivor who was "knocked out" multiple times, became the ultimate catalyst. This experience instilled in him a powerful desire to "make my life count" and create something with a dramatic, positive impact on healthcare.

• Legacy and Inspiration: His late father, a famous doctor who treated India's first AIDS patient, was a major influence, encouraging him to solve the world's biggest problems and reminding him that his work could impact billions of lives.

3. Bugworks' Groundbreaking Approach:

• A New Class of Antibiotics: Bugworks is developing what could be the first truly novel class of broad-spectrum antibiotics in over 60 years.

• The "Double-Trap" Strategy: Their innovative drug is designed to do two things exceptionally well:

  1. Evade Defence: It bypasses the "efflux pumps" that bacteria use to kick out antibiotics.

  2. Hit Two Targets: It attacks the bacteria in two essential places simultaneously (like hitting the "head and the heart"), making it extremely difficult for the bug to develop resistance.

• Global Vision & Access: From day one, the vision was global. A partnership with a WHO-backed group has already secured licensing for their drug in 146 low-to-medium-income countries, ensuring that when it launches, it will be available everywhere, not just in the West.

4. The Future of Drug Discovery in India ("TechBio"):

• AI as the Great Leveller: Artificial Intelligence is completely changing the game. It is dramatically accelerating drug discovery by predicting protein structures (AlphaFold), optimizing clinical trial designs, and predicting a drug's effectiveness in humans. Dr. Anand predicts an 80/20 shift where 80% of the drug value chain will be influenced by AI.

• India's Unique Position: India is perfectly positioned to lead this "TechBio" revolution due to:

  • Affordable Innovation: The cost of R&D is significantly lower than in the West.

  • Talent & Infrastructure: A massive pool of tech talent and a growing ecosystem of incubators (like C-CAMP).

  • The Front Lines: The "worst bugs" are in India's backyard, making it the ideal place to develop solutions that will work for the world.

• Key Hurdles to Overcome:

  • Funding Gap: Lack of patient capital for long-term, high-risk deep science projects.

  • Regulatory Lag: India's regulatory environment needs to accelerate to keep pace with innovation.

  • Private Sector Investment: A cultural shift is needed for large Indian pharma companies to invest more in local R&D and acquire innovative startups.

5. Core Philosophies:

• Make Your Life Count: The driving question should be what you are doing to leave the world a better place than you found it.

• Remain a Lifelong Student: Humility and the constant thirst for knowledge are essential. Dr. Anand surrounds himself with people "10x smarter" than him and is never afraid to ask the most basic questions.

• Philanthropy as Self-Growth: His work with foundations like CHILD (for HIV-affected orphans) and Humanist (for cancer patients) has given him more than he has given, shaping him into a better person.

Dr. Anand Kumar’s journey is more than a business story. It’s a testament to the idea that our greatest challenges can ignite our greatest purpose. It's a story of how one person’s decision to make his life count could end up saving countless others.

Connect with our Guest:

• Bugworks: bugworksresearch.com

• Dr. Anand Anandkumar on LinkedIn: Anand Anandkumar | LinkedIn

Follow Chai and Chips:

• Subscribe on YouTube(Chai & Chips - YouTube), Spotify(Chai & Chips Podcast | Podcast on Spotify), Apple Podcasts(Chai & Chips Podcast - Podcast - Apple Podcasts) or your favourite podcast platform to never miss an episode.

• Leave a review—it helps us reach more listeners!

• Follow Prakash on LinkedIn (Prakash Mallya | LinkedIn) and Twitter (Prakash Mallya (@PrakashMallya) / X) for updates.

Episode Transcript:

Speakers:

• Prakash Mallya (Host)

• Dr. Anand Anandkumar (Guest)

(Intro Music)

[00:00:04] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: There is an opportunity truly to do deep science work that will go to 8.3 billion people around the world.

[00:00:12] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Unfortunately, if India kind of countries continue to use and abuse antibiotics like buying candy in a shop, we are the ones who, and our children and our, our grandchildren and ourselves, will face huge problems.

[00:00:26] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: 60 to 70% of infections that we get, and our family gets, are viral. They're not bacterial.

[00:00:32] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Which means if I just rest it out for four days, stay at home, take Dolo 650, stay hydrated, I'll be fine.

[00:00:42] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: My late father used to always tell me, right? He attended on India's first AIDS patient.

[00:00:47] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: He told me, when I told him I don't want to do Bugworks because it's so tough. Why should I solve the world's problem? And he said, if you crack antibiotics or oncology, your work will go to 8 billion people around the world.

(Main Episode Music Begins)

[00:01:02] Prakash Mallya: Hi viewers, welcome to Chai and Chips. Today we have Dr. Anand Kumar who is the founder and CEO of Bugworks, a biotech startup involved in inventing drugs for untreatable bacterial superbugs.

[00:01:15] Prakash Mallya: They are also involved in drug research in treating specific type of cancers. Anand was a semiconductor designer, a chip designer, believe it or not. And then he took a detour in drug research. We'll talk all about it. The company, Bugworks, has won several national and international awards. And beyond that, Anand is also involved in philanthropic efforts which we will talk about. He is a fantastic musician as well.Last but not the least, he is the co-founder of IESA, India's Electronic and Semiconductor Association, and executive member of Biotech Association of India, code-named ABLE. Welcome to the show, Anand.

[00:02:06] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Thank you so very much, Prakash. It's such a pleasure to be here. Thank you for having me.

[00:02:11] Prakash Mallya: It is, it's an honor. Honor is completely mine. You have done so many different things in life, starting from chip design, you ran a couple of startups if I'm not wrong, and then you went to drug research with Bugworks and before that, another company, Cellworks, right? What made the switch? What is common? At first sight, these two are very different segments.

[00:02:35] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Yeah. Once again, thanks for having me. And Chai and Chips. So your first question starts with chips, you know, semiconductor chips. So I trained in the U.S. My Master's and PhD there and worked as a semiconductor designer, very similar to your life, your past life as well. And then came to India in 2000, thinking I'll be here for two years before going back to U.S. And I was the founding managing director for two companies in the electronics area and life was great. We just started the semiconductor association in India. And when there was no formal semiconductor association, and today we have 600 or 650 members in the semiconductor association.

[00:03:14] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: And it was interesting how life plays out. So I was sitting together with some of my friends from the Bay Area in Whitefield, Bangalore, and we were sitting and thinking saying, hey, semiconductors are really booming. We are using modeling and simulation for transistor circuit design. Are there other areas that we could explore? And we started thinking about financial services to nuclear power to many things. And then a biologist joined that gathering, right? A husband-wife team. She had just come back from Stanford, a neurobiologist. And we said, can we actually use modeling and simulation for biology?

[00:03:50] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: So it's not that I was so great and I had this great vision and intelligence, but I had the passion to say, could we actually take what we learned in semiconductor industry and use that in the biology space to model biological pathways. That's where the thought process started coming. And in my 40s, I started studying biology. So I'm still, my knowledge is very shallow, but enough to make a cogent business case. So Prakash, I started studying biology and the more I started reading biology and cancer pathways, we started visualizing how chip design and transistor semiconductor physics can meet with pathway biology. Crazy ideas. Again, not because we had deep-sighted intelligence, right? But we had the passion to say, can we bring these two areas together to solve such a big problem? So it started from there and then it mushroomed into something that completely changed my life.

[00:04:49] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: So it's interesting that when you want to do something good, right, and we really want to do something good for biology and medicine, somehow things align together to make your vision happen. And I think that was the transition that I did. The last part of that is, I could have just done modeling and simulation in biology and moved away. Right. And said, okay, I've done it. I was hit with my own serious health problems and challenges around that time that almost killed me. Not once, but twice. And I said, if I got my life back at least three times, Prakash, first in 2000 and then 2005 and 2007, right? I'm a cancer survivor. I said, that means my life has to be more purposeful than just being a, you know, a CEO of a company. What if I can do something dramatically in the healthcare space that can give back to society and make a difference in change? So I took advantage of the fact that I got knocked out nearly thrice and I wanted to convert that into something that can unleash things in me that I didn't know existed. These are the reasons why I moved from semiconductor to biotech.

[00:06:01] Prakash Mallya: What an incredible story. Wow. Yeah, it's an inspiration, what you did and what you are continuing to do. So, on Bugworks, right? First of all, I love the brand. It's such a cool brand, Bugworks, right? I, I started to research the company coming up for this conversation. The more I read, it's very, very interesting. The concept of antimicrobial resistance, right? It's an extremely difficult space, very complex as well. Yes. Why did you choose, or why did Bugworks choose to focus on that? What is the difficulty associated with it? And what do you feel could be the path forward?

[00:06:48] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Great, all great questions. So from semiconductors, I started, we started a company called Cellworks which is the precursor to where Bugworks came. Cellworks is still functioning, great company, that uses mathematical modeling, now AI and machine learning to help cancer patients identify medicines for tough cancer patients called personalized medicine. While I was in Cellworks, I started seeing the writing on the wall, waking up every morning to Economic Times and Times of India saying India is losing 2 lakh people, 50,000 children dying of infection, no new antibiotics, existing antibiotics are not working, bugs are becoming more evolved, resistant. Big pharmaceutical companies don't care about this space because it's not money-making.

[00:07:37] Prakash Mallya: And why is that so?

[00:07:37] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: It's very interesting. For your viewers, every other part of pharmaceutical industry, you innovate and then you want people to use your drug a lot so you can make money and obviously also help society. In anti-infective, you are dealing with a live organism which is constantly changing and adapting itself. How are you supposed to innovate and come out with a drug that will work for at least 10, 15, 20 years before the bug breaks the drug? That's one. Which means after spending 15 years and a couple hundred million dollars to do a drug, I have to come Prakash and tell him, please don't use my drug unless you absolutely need it. That patient in the ICU who's dying of bloodstream infection, no other antibiotic is working, use mine. So it's a phenomenal life-saving innovation, but the use cases become narrow. Compared to taking a cholesterol drug or a sugar drug where hundreds of millions use it all their life. So pharmaceutical industry says, my God. First of all, you're chasing a bug that is so smart, that has been around for millions of years when homo sapiens have only been around for 240,000 years. We are a very young species compared to these guys who have been there from the ice age. They're smart, smarter than us. After I crack the problem, I still fail as a company economically. So there are economic challenges, there are science challenges. And to date since the great Alexander Fleming found out antibiotics 100 years ago, in 1923, 100 and 1922, there's only been less than 10 classes of antibiotics. That's it, from penicillin till today.

[00:09:15] Prakash Mallya: I did not know that.

[00:09:16] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: And the last novel class of antibiotics, Prakash, and for your viewers, happened when I was born in 1964. So I feel honored to work in this space and our company has that opportunity of creating the first novel class of a broad antibiotic that can take out all bugs, from head to toe, as I call it, from meningitis to throat issue to lung issues to abdominal issues to skin issues to to bioterrorism, etc. To have a broad spectrum antibiotic, Prakash, is very hard. So I feel honored that we have the ability to work on it. So Bugworks is working on a new class of antibiotics not seen in 60 years. That's three generations. That's the opportunity in front of us. We did Bugworks because as I told you, we lose several million people per year to unsolvable infections because we as a common public, dear friends, abuse antibiotics, particularly in countries like India where it's easily available. You use and abuse it. You have three bullets left in your pocket and you show your bullet to the enemy. The enemy is going to figure out ways of adjusting to that bullet. This is what is happening. Drug resistance spreads. The technical term for that is antimicrobial resistance, or AMR. And we are now in clinical trials. I hope we succeed. It's always very tough. It's like climbing a mountain like Everest with no oxygen as I say, uh, but that's what we are working on. Novel class of antibiotics. IV, serious hospital infections, and also oral tablet available for many parts of the world that may not have access to IV. My most exciting part of all of this is our innovation from India can go all over the world. It's not done just because I want to sell my company to a U.S. pharmaceutical company. The WHO, through a group in the WHO, have invested in our company. And have taken license for 140 of the low to medium income countries. So when we succeed, Prakash, we will not just launch it in the West, but at the same time, it will be launched all over the world.

[00:11:26] Prakash Mallya: Everywhere.

[00:11:26] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: So I honestly wake up and go to sleep with the world map in my house thinking how, how lucky I am that the work that we are doing, if it succeeds, is going to go all over this map. And that is the most gratifying feeling for me that drives me despite it being a very, very tough task.

[00:11:48] Prakash Mallya: You're talking about purpose at the start of it. Can't be a better purpose.

[00:11:53] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: So you are so right. That's my purpose. And my calling.

[00:11:56] Prakash Mallya: Wonderful. Wonderful. You know, the antimicrobial space overall and drug research in general is very, very difficult, right? So it's like, I was reading some of the conversations you've had in the past, 5% success rate, even in Indian cost terms, it would be 150 million or so for an average drug. So with all of these difficulties, what is the difference in the scientific approach Bugworks is taking versus everything else in the industry that gives you a unique position to succeed?

[00:12:34] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Great question. A bunch of things. Drug discovery is extremely tough. It is a game of snakes and ladders. You get a few ladders and then you hit a snake and you go down and you have to restart, which is what we are struggling also through. It's a 100, 200 million dollars, 10 to 15 years. Therefore, the antibiotic space, there is no pipeline in the world. We got some funding from the United States government and Indian government and private investors who believed in my team. I can't take any credit for the scientific prowess of Bugworks. We were very fortunate, Prakash, that, you know, in a strange way, that when I wanted to do an antibiotic company, AstraZeneca, who had a fabulous infection team, closed its operation in India, right? Because they decided that oncology is a better area. That talent pool became part of my founding talent pool. They are phenomenal scientists. 25, 30 years working on malaria, tuberculosis, and now working on hospital infections, right? So I got a good talent base to work. We said, to your question, if we did the same thing that everybody else has done and expect that because we are doing it, we're going to succeed, it won't happen. Let's take a different approach. So the team came together and used some amazing thinking around microbiology, medicinal chemistry, modeling and simulation to figure out new interesting ways of entering the bug and staying in the bug. You have compounds that can enter the bug, but the bug has got pumps that turn on, and these pumps can kick the antibiotic out. That's called e-flux pumps. My amazing scientists, all credit to them, none to me, figured out new chemistry that makes these compounds sort of invisible to the pump. So you get into the, get into the enemy's house. The lights are off in the enemy's house, so the enemy can't see me and then I puncture the enemy. And they were able to hit two targets inside the bacteria. It's like hitting the enemy in the head and the heart. So it's too much of a shock for the organism for it to want to be able to say I'm going to figure out ways of defending myself. So the kill is very sharp. And because we hit two targets, you puncture the bacteria. And luckily for us, Prakash, that's where some, some alchemy helped us. The same two places I hit are available across all types of bacteria. So that is where I'm getting a broad spectrum impact. Whether it is health care or bioterrorism pathogens, if these are nasty bacteria with those two targets, we get them all. So we become a one-stop shop. That became the difference between us and others. Two, doing this work in India, far more affordable than doing it in Boston. And the microbiologists and the drug discovery people I work with here are as good as the best in the world. Three, I didn't have to build an ecosystem in Bangalore. Go Bangalore. The type of incubators and accelerators that we have here, the one we sit in is called C-CAMP, Center for Cellular and Molecular Platforms. It's based in NCBS, National Center for Biological Sciences gave us a great facility. So I didn't have to build a facility overnight, right? So local infrastructure, talent pool, and last but not the least, the worst bugs in the world are in my backyard here. Right? So if you're able to figure out ways of killing the worst multidrug resistant bacteria in India, that solution works for the world. In anti-infective, we say what works in India will buy and large will work for the rest of the world. These are our differentiators. And truly last point is many companies who have tried and failed recently have failed because they want to launch in the West. The cost of doing clinical trials is super expensive and market conditions are not favorable for revenue. Low to medium income countries is where the problem is. Ladies and gentlemen, India loses 4 lakh people per year. Year on year. My people need it. My doctors are most willing to adopt a new antibiotic because they need it. So why go and try to solve an unsolved, why you go try to think you're solving a problem that's very small in the West and much bigger in our backyard. So your markets have to be here. Your tough testing has to be here. So it's a confluence of all of this coming together and the WHO has now made AMR Prakash as the top three problems in the globe.

[00:17:19] Prakash Mallya: Oh. I did not know this.

[00:17:21] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Yes. Top three problems because it can wipe out 10 million, 15 million people and it's the basic edifice of modern medicine. Imagine anybody in your family or my family, go to Manipal hospital or go for a surgery, you're hoping they'll come out alive without any infection. Correct. Because you're hoping that post-surgery, no infection will happen or if infection happens, that antibiotic will work.What if the antibiotic didn't work?

[00:17:45] Prakash Mallya: Doesn't work.

[00:17:45] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: As it is happening in many, many, many places now. Operation successful, patient gone. So these are all the reasons where anti-infectives have come out to the forefront. India can become not only the noisy problem area of the world but a solution provider for the world.

[00:18:04] Prakash Mallya: Very cool. And fast forward a few years, what could be the long-term vision for Bugworks?

[00:18:10] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: The long-term vision for Bugworks, excellent point is two things. One is our phase one clinical trial where we got hit with the problem and lost two years. We hit the snake in number 96 and went down and now we are working our way up. We complete phase one next year, we'll come to India to do our phase two and three. My vision, our vision for our company is this product can be launched in the West and countries like India at the same time. Amazing. Our people need it. Our doctors call on us. We get calls every month for our products which are not ready today. So there is a vision here to take this product all over the world. Partner with the group in WHO that will take it to the low to medium income countries - 146. We want to launch in India. Okay. And you know, we, we make jokes that we want to have the word India and Bangalore, I-N-B-A, Inba, in our product when it comes out. In Inbam, in Tamil, which is my mother tongue, means, you know, happiness, Inbam and peace. So there is an opportunity truly to do deep science work that will go to 8.3 billion people around the world. That doesn't happen every other day. Yeah. Therein lies our excitement.

[00:19:20] Prakash Mallya: Inba. Okay. So cool. That one, those four words will be there in the name of the product when it comes out. And what's the timeframe you are thinking?

[00:19:35] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Great question. Normally it would have been six, seven years. It's like very tough. But now because we are desperate for new medicines in many parts of the world, including India, Southeast Asia, Africa, even in the West, accelerated timelines are there. Next year when we complete our phase one, after phase one in three years, we'll be able to launch this product. Either through compassionate use or regular use. The world waits for this product. But I stay humbled by the enormity of taking this to completion and by the snakes and ladders game that, you know, if you're lucky, you will always only hit ladders. We've already hit one snake, as I said. So that just keeps you grounded, but doesn't deter you from that overarching vision that drives us.

[00:20:25] Prakash Mallya: So, all that you mentioned in terms of path you've taken on scientific approach, despite that, are the bacteria there, do they have the wherewithal to counter for resistance?

[00:20:43] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Beautiful question. For you and your audience, right? Alexander Fleming found 1922 and he, he won the Nobel Prize, right? For penicillin. And in his Nobel Prize speech, instead of saying, 'I'm great, I did good work,' he said, 'I'm already worried.' So the audience was like, 'Wow, why are you worried?' Because by the time my lifetime is over, my drug would have been beaten by the bug. Bug will always beat the drug. So it's only a matter of time before changes happen. Unfortunately, if India kind of countries continue to use and abuse antibiotics like buying candy in a shop, we are the ones who, and our children and our, our grandchildren and ourselves, will face huge problems. So a major societal change is slowly happening now. States like Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, you can't just go into a pharma store and say, 'Give me the latest antibiotic.'

[00:21:35] Prakash Mallya: Oh, is that so?

[00:21:36] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: It is great. Kerala to the fore, right? In the WHO meetings, they look at Kerala and they're calling it the Kerala model. Just like Gujarat model for development, they say Kerala model for antibiotics. That says that you use it responsibly. And immediately the drug resistance rates drops.

[00:21:53] Prakash Mallya: Yeah. That's true.

[00:21:55] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: If you don't use and you don't abuse it, the bug doesn't get to see it. Yeah. that often, so it can't change itself. So our product when it comes out will also get beaten by the bacteria, but because these rules are changing all over the world, thankfully even in India, and because we are hitting the bacteria in two places, Prakash and we've done simulations to where even if the bug gets smart and takes out one target, the other target will get it. So it's going to take it 35 to 40 years before it's going to defeat Bugworks' product. And we will give humanity two generations. That's, that will be our contribution.

[00:22:33] Prakash Mallya: In fact, a lot of it, I feel, is education in terms of not using antibiotics. And, I'm guilty of it myself, right? I mean, all of us. We take antibiotics way more than is needed. If people understand what is at stake,

[00:22:45] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: I'd like to make, if you don't mind me sharing this to all your audience, right? Particularly in India, 60-70, 60 to 70% of infections that we get and our family gets are viral, not bacterial.

[00:22:55] Prakash Mallya: That is very interesting. Okay, viral.

[00:23:01] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Which means if I just rest it out for four days, stay at home, take Dolo 650, stay hydrated, you'll be fine.

[00:23:09] Prakash Mallya: I'll be fine.

[00:23:09] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Instead of that, we go running to the clinic and tell the doctor, 'Doctor, doctor, give me antibiotics,' or worse, somebody in the family says, 'I have extra Azithromycin, please try it.' It's the worst social habit we have. We've destroyed all our antibiotics, which is why every year I say, totally we're losing four to five lakh people. It's like having a COVID continuing on. Except we don't talk about it. Because it's a silent killer. COVID was this big wave that came and went, right? So we said COVID. I mean, you know, here, every year, 50 people here, 100 people here, 150 people here, finally, when it comes to my own family, I could have the same problem. Yeah. So our behaviors need to change. Antibiotics is the last resort of the entire medical edifice. And that edifice is crumbling. You could have the best robotics, best surgeon, best laser, and yet post-surgery get an infection, or deliver a baby who picks up an infection and she cannot be saved.

[00:24:10] Prakash Mallya: No. That's very sad. Yeah, I would agree. So, switching gears, you recently got an award by Forbes, right? As an innovator. And when you were receiving the award, you talked about, to quote you, 'India does not celebrate science as much as it should.' But you still started Bugworks in India. You talked everything that you and your team has achieved. What has been the specific challenges you faced or continuing to face as you build a really cutting-edge deep-tech research, drug research company out of India?

[00:24:52] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Yeah, this is a very beautiful question that involves science, it involves socioeconomics. First of all, as a country, we spend 0.7% of our GDP, 0.7% of our GDP towards R&D. Extremely poor for R&D.

[00:25:11] Prakash Mallya: And why do you think?

[00:25:12] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: I think, I'll be honest, you know, we are, we are a young country. We've done brilliantly well. We are only 75 years old. That's all. Since independence, right? So, so we have to look at it in two ways. So, survival and coming out of that colonialist regime itself has taken us this much time, right? So, as long as if we got a government job in my father's generation, we were happy. Then that moved to from government jobs, as long as I got a private job and I got settled, it was fine. Then one half a generation before us or our generation said, 'IT services, I'm fine.' Now, New India is looking at space technology, you know, semiconductors, AI, biotech, EV, etc, etc. This is happening now. It has taken us this much time to come here. But our forefathers did brilliant thing for India, except a couple of things we didn't get it right. Amount we spend on healthcare is extremely low for a country of 1.4 billion. We're less than 2% of GDP. We need to be at 6%. The amount we spend for R&D, your question, is 0.7%. So, our DNA, we just came out of that difficult colonialist time and we, we are kicking ass now, but we lost out some years. Low investment in R&D. Investor mentality in India, and I don't blame them because the DNA is like that, is services-oriented, or today if I can do an app that delivers a pizza faster to you and I have eyeballs on that app, it's easier for me to get funded on that. Nothing wrong with that. That's also a nice, I'd like to get a pizza faster in my house. So I'm not denigrating it. But R&D spend is very low in our country. There is no patient capital. It is hard to do. But I decided to do here, one, because we thought, 'What looks like a huge problem, can we convert it into an opportunity?' What if we are one of the first five or six folks who get an opportunity to make mistakes, fall down, get up, fall down, get up, but do pioneering work and create pathways that my next generation will take my work and do it 100 times better? That's how science progresses. My late father used to always tell me, right? He was a famous doctor who practiced for 52 years, Dr. J. R. Sankaran, from Madras Medical College, he attended on India's first AIDS patient. Okay? He told me, when I told him I don't want to do Bugworks because it's so tough. Why should I solve the world's problem? And he said, 'If you crack antibiotics or oncology, your work will go to 8 billion people around the world.' Who don't know you exist. But you can feel proud that you came to this world and did something that has the impact, right? Those people don't know you exist. Which is wonderful. And he said, 'When you're done with your science, all you would have done is you would have laid one or two bricks on the wall of humanity.' You don't know how that wall of humanity is going to go. How deep, how wide, where it's going to go, but it's going to go with or without me. What if I can lay one brick on that wall? Those were some of the motivations, personal inspirations that we did it. But your second half of your question is, what are the challenges? The challenges are there is simply no funding ecosystem for deep science. The funding that we got from the Indian government and I thank the Indian government, they've done a good job at the base level. 50 lakhs, 1 crore.

[00:28:01] Prakash Mallya: Smaller ticket size.

[00:28:02] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Smaller ticket size. Exactly. That didn't even exist. So we have to appreciate that 5 to 6,000 biotech companies have formed in the last 10, 15 years, which didn't exist before, Prakash. That's great. 98% will fail. That's okay. 2% from them will come out and become the Biocons of the world and change the world. So, we have done a good job at the base level. We've done a good job of creating basic accelerators and incubators like where I stay. But after that, the next orbit is non-existent. If I have to raise 5 million or 10 million, those are small numbers in Boston and Bay Area and Seattle and London. You will not find investors easily here. You have to beg and borrow and plead and it's tough. I've aged just trying to raise money in India to do this. If we don't have that purpose and passion that keeps driving you, it's easy to give up and say I'll go do other things.

[00:28:50] Prakash Mallya: And in one of the conversations you mentioned, out of 200 dialogues you have, one or two succeed.

[00:28:56] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Yeah, about 250 now. So I have failed more than I've succeeded. And you know, these are things that truly keep us grounded that people who have slapped us and said, 'Don't do this, you're wasting your time. You don't need to solve the world's problem,' or 'Will I get a return in three years?' Very fair questions. It's his or her money. They have the right to ask that question. It's just that you don't have that ecosystem. You know, it's so interesting, it's finally, you know, the ones who put money in me finally do it because they believe in the team and they believe that we have to solve our own problems. When you strike a chord with someone who understands that nobody's going to come to India and solve my problem. I'm the diabetes capital of the world, infection capital of the world, oncology capital of the world. Yeah. I need to find my own solutions. That's the Viksit Bharat that we talk about, self-sustenance. If I don't have self-sustenance in health care, everything else collapses.

[00:29:51] Prakash Mallya: That's very true.

[00:29:52] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Last point I have is our regulatory environment is still one generation behind the United States and China. So lack of funding and the regulatory speed in New Delhi, these are the two biggest impediments in moving our deep science engine forward, whether it's space, whether it's EV, whether it's biotech.

[00:30:17] Prakash Mallya: Okay. That's a fantastic summary. And before we venture into the space of what could be the potential for India, let me do a lightning round with you, where I could ask you a set of fun questions so that audience come to know a little more about Dr. Anand as well as Anand. Lab bench or boardroom, which energizes you more right now?

[00:30:45] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: I'm so sorry. Neither. It's the hallway. It's the conversations in the hallway that energize me the most.

[00:30:52] Prakash Mallya: Okay. Biotech timelines or chip design timelines, which industry requires more patience, you think?

[00:31:01] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Biotech, much more than chip design. Chip design works on physics. Biotech works on biology. Many more unknown unknowns in biology.

[00:31:12] Prakash Mallya: Unknown unknowns.

[00:31:13] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Therefore, the timelines are always more in biotech.

[00:31:15] Prakash Mallya: Yeah. Yeah. Bug you fear the most, no pun intended.

[00:31:21] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: It's not a bug. It's a word called complacency. That's the bug I fear the most.

[00:31:30] Prakash Mallya: Yeah.

[00:31:31] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Because that complacency in everything we do, I, I always tell my children that we can solve the bugs, the bacterial and viral bugs, but that complacency, that human bug, that's the one I worry about the most.

[00:31:44] Prakash Mallya: Agree. Yeah. Chai or chips, which brainstorming, while brainstorming the next molecule?

[00:31:54] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Chai.

[00:31:55] Prakash Mallya: Okay.

[00:31:55] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Because I need that caffeine. You need to have this rush going. I love chips, but that rush of energy is your chai. So I'll choose your chai for my next big thinking.

[00:32:06] Prakash Mallya: Okay. Thank you. The biggest challenge that biotech startups specifically in India face.

[00:32:13] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Sorry, it's a coin, two sides of the coin. The challenges are going to be to be able to de-risk the capital requirement for the company is the biggest challenge, closely followed and coupled with the fact that our regulatory environment and paradigms are lagging. So, it's a coin, as an answer, the two sides of the coin are capital de-riskification. and regulatory paradigm not keeping up with the speed that's required.

[00:32:41] Prakash Mallya: Okay. And last question, what's the one thing you wish more people understood when it comes to inventing new drugs or medicines?

[00:32:51] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: That's a very profound question. Most people should understand that if their family is safe today and they are safe today, it's because there's good medicines. True. Somebody has worked 20, 30 years of doing science and you don't know who they are. But somebody somewhere around the world, including India, has toiled to make your family safe. Whether it's your food, the environment, the air we breathe, or health care, all of them require deep science and deep research and drug discovery is on the health side. If as a nation, we don't make scientific discovery part of our consciousness, we will always remain to be a services-oriented country, that people need to understand. Again, nothing wrong with services, look what it has done to our country. Transformed our country. But moving forward to become that Viksit Bharat, people need to understand that if we don’t solve our healthcare issues with our own inventions and stay focused and invent our science, we will be left far behind. We will be 1.7B but sick population.

[00:34:22] Prakash Mallya: That's true. Well said. Lets come back to our conversation on superbugs, Bugworks and much more. So, you talked about it, right? And we saw it during Covid as well. India is such a powerhouse when it comes to drug manufacturing. I think its fast becoming a manufacturer for the whole world if not already. The other part is drug research where we don’t do enough exactly to your point. So what do you believe is the potential for drug research coming out of India that can solve world problems like the ones you mentioned and beyond.

[00:35:02] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: This is the most exciting question of the lot as its so forward-looking and so real. We have done a great job in manufacturing and we have to appreciate that. There is innovation in manufacturing too to figure out cheaper, faster routes is innovation in India. We started as generic companies right? That’s why we can get Dolo 650 or Crocin I can get cheaply. The whole world depends on Indian generic drugs because they are good quality and they are affordable. You and I have lived in United States. If you walk into Walgreens or CVS, I always look at where its manufactured. In most cases, it’ll be India if its over the counter because India is very strong. And we showed the world, ladies and gentlemen during vaccines that we care for the world. If we didn’t have Bharat Biotech, SERUM Institute of India etc, many parts of the world would not have gotten vaccines. The vaccines of the West don’t work for the rest of the world because you need a cold chain. How can I get a mRNA vaccine in some godforsaken interior Karnataka or Tamilnadu place where you say, ‘please keep it at minus 8 degrees.’ They wouldn’t even know what minus eight degrees mean. Therefore we were able to invent stuff that was affordable and can work in hot tropical climates around the world. We saved the world and our people. That’s why manufacturing is very important. But moving forward the value chain in stunted if we stay only in manufacturing. Value chain is always for the person who does the discovery and development because they cream it and the West has been creaming that. With all the fantastic manufacturing potential we have, with the changing biotech infrastructure thanks to government involvement, with the hopefully changing regulatory paradigm, we are actually perfectly set to get into drug discovery. There is good talent. Believe it or not, lots of good talent is coming from United States, Indian-Americans want to come back. This actually the perfect time. For China, its phenomenal. 20,000 Chinese scientists came back in the last 3-4 years back to China from US. Maybe there is an opportunity for reverse brain drain. So we get some senior talent pool coming in who come from drug discovery background and use the manufacturing prowess of India. The last point there the most important point is there is something that’s levelling the playing field between the West and East. It’s called artificial intelligence. AI is completely changing the way how even drug discovery is done.

[00:37:44] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Therefore when you used to say, ‘let me wait for something to come from America, it’s going to take 20 years to come or 30 years to come. In terms of competency today its happening in a matter of months. I’m telling you this ladies and gentlemen for your audience, if drug discovery is 100% and AI is used 10% today and 90% the rest, in a matter of two years, it may be 80:20. 80% of the drug value chain in two years could be influenced by Artificial Intelligence only 20% may sit in conventional areas. If I am even approximately correct, with the power we have in India – smart technology people we have, the next generation that’s raring to go, who have grown up on ChatGPT already in the past 2 to 3 years, they don’t think like us. So the playing field is going to be levelled.

[00:38:39] Prakash Mallya: Because of talent.

[00:38:42] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Because of talent they’re ready to take risk, they don’t even need degrees as long as they know the skill. So if you have a team of 40 people, if I had six to eight drug discovery people who bring drug discovery skills and the rest can be tech biologists not biotech. I am going to call it tech bio. These companies in India are going to flip and become tech bio companies. Tech bio is going to make the playing field levelled. So I actually think this is a great time for India. With all its manufacturing background with new technologies coming in, this is a fabulous time as long as we can solve the funding gap and the regulation gap.

[00:39:22] Prakash Mallya: So you talked about the R&D, the state of R&D and what could be done. Talked about talent, incredible talent we have. You talked about patient capital. Those are essential elements for making the vision that you talked about happen. And of course government policy. So are there any steps you believe India can take in those areas. And even beyond like you talked about the ecosystem in Bangalore. You are doing a pilot along with CyteCare in oncology space. It’s a fantastic example of industry collaboration. But from a policymaking, talent, R&D, patient capital are there concrete steps we can take to make it better?

[00:40:08] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Yes. Very, again, very multi-faceted question. The government, particularly Department of Biotechnology, has been phenomenal in the last 10 to 15 years. Phenomenal given all the constraints of operating within government. As I told you, there are more than 6,000 biotech companies now, and even if a small percentage of them succeed, we have found problems for our khana, we have found problems for our hawa, and we have found problems for our health. Okay. These incubators and accelerators for biotech innovation are coming up in 45 to 50 parts of the country right now. When I started, it was in three parts.

[00:40:44] Prakash Mallya: Oh, wow.

[00:40:45] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: So, 45 centers of excellence like C-CAMP, like Bangalore cluster across the country.

[00:40:51] Prakash Mallya: And who is building them?

[00:40:53] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: It's usually public-private partnership kind of a thing. There will be a Tata Foundation plus the government or local industry plus government. But the government of Karnataka, of course, is a leader. That is why you find such a large percentage of startups in, in Karnataka. And which is amazing. And then there is Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, but Karnataka is there is no comparison. It's a distant second after it. So these incubators and accelerators are happening all over the country is a major change. The question you asked is fantastic. If we don't, and we have to be humble about something. While we are proud of India, sometimes we posture more than we deliver. The Chinese are way ahead of us in biotech. I'm sorry to say, they're about 10 years ahead of us. And I will not be exaggerating if I told you, in some areas, they are ahead of the United States. Just because you and I are not aware of it, doesn't mean it's not happening.

[00:41:53] Prakash Mallya: It does not happen. Yeah.

[00:41:56] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Whether it's EV or semiconductor, biotech, the biggest deals in biotech are not happening in Boston and Cambridge. They're happening in Shanghai and Beijing.

[00:42:00] Prakash Mallya: And why is that so?

[00:42:02] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: It's because they are innovating at speeds unknown to man. 20,000 plus talent has moved from United States and UK, ghar wapsi. Government is spending lots of billions of dollars into R&D research because they know R&D requires government support before private people come. When government is spending billions of dollars, private industry then comes into collaborates as public-private partnering. That blueprint, you don't need to take it 100% because I know China is different, India is different. We are a proud nation, you know, we are Viksit Bharat, but there are some lessons. Maybe government instead of spending hundreds of millions of dollars needs to invest much more. So whether it's semiconductor or, you know, EV or biotech, this is our opportunity. The next five years, if as a nation, we don't put deep money as a government and private, public-private, so it's not only the government's problem, we would lose out. Then we're going to continue doing outsourced work for others. Nothing wrong. We'll continue doing services, nothing wrong, but the value in all of the IP will be outside of the country.

[00:43:10] Prakash Mallya: Yeah. Agree.

[00:43:13] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: So I hope the government, by the way, we should be so appreciative, just two weeks ago, Prakash, three weeks, government announced a 1 lakh crore fund.

[00:43:21] Prakash Mallya: Correct.

[00:43:23] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Phenomenal. Now, will there be complexities in how it's implemented? You bet. But we should, you know, be appreciative that they have woken up. The government is very forward-looking. 1 lakh crore is a significant amount. When we used to cry for 50 lakhs. If this is properly implemented, Yeah. and they take inputs from industry along with academia. That's the mistake we make. We have only academics driving all these government committees. What you need, government, industry, industry coming in. You know why NIH became what it's become, right? Why did NSF in the United States become what it's become? They have great people from industry, academia, government that that triumvirate, yes, coming together. That is lacking. You know, nothing wrong with academics, but you need academia, industry, government and government coming together to make policy. I'm very encouraged by this 1 lakh crore fund. That's something that didn't happen before now. Let's hope that that spawns off a fantastic cascade. That makes us invest in science and solve problems for our children and our grandchildren's generation from here. Otherwise, you're going to continue importing, paying big money, complaining why is this cancer medicine costing so much? Why is this infection medicine costing so much? Wait for it to become generic. Then my people make it and it's available for me. I want it today. And I want it to be affordable today. For that, I have to innovate. As they say, you have to innovate your way out of problems.

[00:44:54] Prakash Mallya: True. And one nuance I would love your opinion on is you talked about R&D and the collaboration requirement and the percentage of R&D spend being low in India, which is completely true. But the nuance behind that is the private sector investment on R&D is lower than government.

[00:45:09] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Wow. That is so true, right? And I, I know I was remiss in not mentioning this. I'm always asked by investors, why do you guys not have exits in India? We hear about Bugworks, but how many biotech companies have had investments from big Indian pharma companies? I'll sit mum. How many biotech companies, whether it's devices, diagnostics, drug discovery, have had exits licensing deals from big pharma companies? How many biotechs have had full M&A acquisition by your famed manufacturing industry? Almost none. There'll be one or two here and there which is hard to find. This is the backdrop we have. You're right. We spend so much time talking about what the government needs to do, but we need to talk about the private sector. You are so right. And the private sector's investment in its own R&D is low. Therefore, the money it has to invest in other small companies and partner with them and acquire them is even smaller, which is why the VCs are not coming. I'll be honest, when I, because I talk to VCs all over the world, we say, why are you not coming to India? India is the best story. They never blame government for lack of investment. They blame government only for regulation. Because they don't think it's a government's problem to fix all your funding problems. It's true. They say, hey, your private industry seems quite happy making their profits and to their shareholders. But the last five years, that is also changing. The big companies are now investing in their own R&D and we hear them making some noise just last week, Prakash. I'll finish my statement with that. One of the Indian companies called Glenmark, Glenmark Pharma, Mumbai based did a deal in oncology for innovation - 700 million dollars upfront for innovation plus milestones. It made all of us sit up and say, ‘yes’, looks like innovation is also starting to come from our companies. Hopefully, we'll be able to partner with such large companies. So, these are all green shoots.Green shoots in our R&D.

[00:47:20] Prakash Mallya: Yeah. Wonderful. So you said something about AI as you were talking about what could shift. And I would agree with you there is a lot of intersection between science and technology that can be driven out of AI. So what potentially do you see are the intersects between biology and technologies or computational technology that can be beneficial? You said it it's going to switch completely to 80-20 instead of 20-80 today.

[00:47:50] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Yes, yes, yes.

[00:47:53] Prakash Mallya: So are there things that you feel India as a country could pay attention to? The steps we could take to really get ahead or leapfrog, Yes. in terms of drug research.

[00:47:59] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Wow. Very forward-looking question. I appreciate that. So, I want to step back. When I started my semiconductor and you come from the semiconductor background, early '90s started working in the U.S. I was lucky that from day one of my job as a chip designer in a company called Hughes, Hughes Aircraft company, I was asked to start looking at using modern methods for chip design. All the designers who had been working for 20, 30 years before me are like, 'You're doing transistor design by hand. We're handcrafting it and creating a semiconductor. You're going to come and write a program that's going to build a counter or you're going to write a program that's going to build pieces of the microcontroller.' And I jumped straight into it. And within three years, that group became almost entirely using high-level languages like Verilog, VHDL, etc. And now semiconductor has moved much higher into AI. In drug discovery, it's even harder. The people you work with are all PhDs, postdocs, double PhD, double postdoc, who have spent their entire lives looking at one protein or one synthesis or one thing. Their rate of change is very slow. There is always a lot of friction to say, I know what I'm doing for 25, 30 years. How can AI come and do it? That has changed in the last 12 months. Because people are starting to see from Google to Meta to Nvidia, people are starting to say AI biology is going to be the biggest thing because it changes, like I said, it changes your oota, it changes your hawa, it changes your health. Three most important things for us.

[00:49:33] Prakash Mallya: That's true.

[00:49:35] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: The air you breathe, the food you eat, and the health of you and your family. Correct?

[00:49:38] Prakash Mallya: Well summarized.

[00:49:40] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Nothing can be more important. EV is nice, but it comes next. Right? Mobility comes next.

[00:49:45] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: So, to your question, artificial intelligence has come up very quickly and is going exponentially. You know, thanks to Nvidia, thanks to large language models, you know, all of this stuff are happening. And Google has invested a lot into this space through what is called AlphaFold.

[00:50:01] Prakash Mallya: AlphaFold. Yeah.

[00:50:04] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: What used to take a year to hit an X-ray on a protein and get its crystal structure is happening in minutes. Because of learning. So structural biology, where you're looking at proteins and trying to find out their structure is the first place that's almost going entirely into AI. Once you have a structure of something, you need to figure out how a compound is going to come and connect and roll around with that structure. It's a tough problem to solve. That problem is also starting to get solved. You can visually see if your compound is connecting, how is it connecting, can I change the compound slightly, run simulations, blah, blah, blah, and garbage in, garbage out. You need to put good data in too.

[00:50:47] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: But 70% of drug discovery, Prakash, for you for your audience, the cost and the time is in clinical trials. That's the tough part. It's not all this beautiful discovery here. You go to clinical trials, something that worked in animal doesn't work in human for whatever reason.

[00:51:00] Prakash Mallya: Yeah. And it takes a long time as well.

[00:51:05] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Three, four, five, six, seven years, $100 million-$150 million, 7%-8% success rate. That's where the problem is, not in upstream discovery. There, AI is changing everything. The entire FDA database, European Medicines database, Indian CDSCO database has been studied by AI. So it knows all protocols ever done for any medicine. So it understands how to come up with the most optimal clinical trial protocol design. And by doing that can potentially allow adaptive clinical trials that you run on N number of patients. If you get this result, reduce the number of patients. If you get that result, increase the number of patients, adaptively it can come up with new protocols. And most importantly, prediction of whether your medicine will work in man. We are not yet there. That is going to completely change drug discovery. If I have predictive algorithms that says, if we get this kind of data on a dog or a mouse model, you're likely to have success in human who has this kind of background. That gap is being closed now. So that is why I'm saying in a couple of years, it's going to be 80-20. Is it going to replace drug discovery people? Absolutely not. That's a moot discussion. But with a group of 10, 15, 20 good drug discovery people, you add AI machine learning to it, it's going to do wonders. And any company that doesn't move that way, including mine, will become dinosaurs.

[00:52:37] Prakash Mallya: And what have you started to make the moves on in terms of new workflow, new research, new thoughts?

[00:52:42] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: My team is excellent. You know, I respect them. They had initial hesitancy because AI was much more hype than reality five years ago. Everybody's getting funded saying, you know, I can go to the moon tomorrow with AI, right? So, I appreciate them. They want to see data. Now that they're starting to see data, we see them incorporating a lot of tools in in simulating how my drug is going to behave in man. You know, the characteristics when you take a drug, it has to go, concentration rises, comes out, right? That's called ADME and pharmacokinetics, they've started looking at a lot of AI tools for that. They're looking at AI tools to customize clinical trial protocol design. They're looking at AI tools to look at how a molecule is coming and binding with the structure. I see that happening. And my previous company, Cellworks, we are collaborating with them and they are predicting which patients my oncology drug will work and why. And then we, our collaboration with CyteCare hospital that you mentioned, where we sit inside CyteCare hospital and we get patient sample, they use AI. So basically, after you get the patient sample, you put your drug on it to see what happens to that tumor sample and digital pathology takes a picture of it and does a study and tells us, 'Your drug is actually getting into the tumor and causing the tumor to shrink in size.' So this is a new world. Gone are the days that says, 'You cannot be in drug discovery if you don't have 15, 20 years experience doing structural biology or, you know, pharmacokinetics.' Still need that knowledge base. But AI is changing the playing field and I don't think we are late in adopting. I would have preferred us to have adopted something even faster five years ago, but I respect why my guys had a push back because it was so much hype. So initially, things start with hype and now it's leveled off into an exciting reality. Yeah. and you would see Bugworks making some announcements on AI in the years to come.

[00:54:40] Prakash Mallya: Look forward to it. So you have done a couple of startups in drug research, chip design before that. Your company is recognized across the world. What are one or two achievements or milestones you believe are very close to your heart and how did you come about doing that along with your team?

[00:55:06] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Right. Oh, yeah, past milestones, right? By the way, the milestone I'm looking forward to is a completion of our Phase one clinical trial.

[00:55:10] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: That should change everything. Because that will really put India on a on a world map. That we can do it, we're moving to Phase two, and people will take us very seriously. The milestones we've done, the very fact that we could put a drug discovery team in India when everyone said it's not doable, don't do it, get into manufacturing, nothing wrong with manufacturing, we still doing good work. And we went where no one else has gone is in itself a milestone. And I couldn't have gone there had it not been for all the investors who believed in us. They only believed in the people and the messaging. I don't have spreadsheets. Business pitch doesn't have spreadsheets. So that means they have to believe in the message, the messenger, and the message. And the team and invest in us. So I'm really, really, really thankful to all of them. And I'm thankful to my team. None left us because this kind of work they won't get anywhere else. So, the very fact that we have been able to put a company like this together was in itself a big victory. Second big milestone is to get the US government to invest in an Indian company via a grant called CARB-X. C-A-R-B X. It's a huge milestone. Without that, we couldn't be where we are. And the third milestone is having the WHO on the table partnering with us, which doesn't happen to small biotechs. To take your innovation all over the world and believe in us even when we are having problems. And the fourth and the large, last milestone is the ability to work with a hospital like CyteCare hospital and to forge a local partnership where we gain access to post-surgery tumor to test our products etc is quite unprecedented in India. It's not unprecedented in Cambridge, but here it is. So these few milestones, you know, I'm humbled about, but I'm really looking forward to waking up next year when our Phase one clinical trial is done, because then we will accelerate two and three and try to bring this product to man quickly.

[00:57:15] Prakash Mallya: Very, very cool. So you and when you founded Bugworks, you and your founders, co-founders were in your 50s and 60s at that time, right? That is in itself is an inspiration for everyone, including me. No question, right? So what are the things that a young innovator sitting out of India wanting to do like putting India on the map like the work you're doing here could learn from your journey through that path.

[00:57:45] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Right. Yeah, we are often asked this question and and I speak to college audiences as well. There is this notion among youngsters today that they can, five of them can get laptops, sit in Koramangala in a third-wave cafe and do startups and make money overnight. Thankfully, people are understanding that that's just, it's a fallacy. When they look at people in their 50s and 60s trying to solve big problems, I think I hope, I hope they will take inspiration that there are people watching out for us and our parents and our children by doing stuff that is so groundbreaking. That they could just retire. I'm 60 today. I could just simply retire and sing or do whatever it is that I like to do, philanthropy that I'm very passionate about. But I feel that, you know, I have a short life and I want to make my life count. I want these youngsters to know that they're growing up in a brilliant India that you and I didn't have. We left abroad because we thought US was everything. You know, and today US is a different topic for another chai and chips. But I want these youngsters to realize that they're growing up in a new India. That's waiting for 2047 when we are going to be a developed country. They have to contribute. They cannot ask what is India doing for me. As John F. Kennedy said, right? Ask not what the country does for you, but what you do for the country. If I can steal his quotation, I tell those youngsters, if somebody in their 40s and 50s are willing to dedicate the rest of their life in solving big problems that are going to impact that youngster's life when she or he is in their 40s, let's say diabetes or cardiovascular or infection, this is a great country to be in. That means people believe in our country. They're just not waiting for somebody else to solve my problem. And I'm waiting for the the western company to solve my problem. I want them to know that investment in science, solving our problems, and making your life count is the biggest lesson. There is no religious lesson, there is no nothing else that is of interest except saying, I have come. I am here. I’m in a beautiful country. You know that’s a pathbreaking country. What am I doing to make my life count? That’s the only thing I leave a youngster with because they’re a Whatsapp generation. They don’t have time for anything else. If they cant know that there’s a guy in his 60 who wants to till his last breath do work not because I’m interested in money or fame because all of those things are fallacies and transient. But I want to say I came into this world. What am I leaving this world with? Is it a better place than it was when I came? That's what is a question I want to leave them with.

[01:00:27] Prakash Mallya: Super. Super. So, you have done so much in your life, right? A lot of it you talked about, a lot more we haven't talked about. And one element of it is philanthropy. So, you have founded companies, your switch from chip design to semiconductors. You are such an inspiration, such a passionate spokesperson for drug research coming out of India, and you still find time for philanthropy. So, what is it about? What's your goal there? And if the audience can learn more about it, it would be wonderful.

[01:01:00] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: I'd like to first of all start by saying that by doing philanthropy, I have never helped anyone. I want to be very honest. It has made me a better person. So, if somebody is thinking that I want to do philanthropy because I want to help the world, it's a wrong way to go into it. I'll be I'll be very honest. We have to be very humble by the fact that opportunities are all around us. I grabbed those opportunities. I have never, you know, really, not that, oh, 10,000 people have benefited by what I have done. I have benefited by the philanthropic journey. I want to put that point out straight out there, right? So it has given more to me than I have given to it. Point number two, I came from a family, as I said, my dad practiced for 53 years, he changed medicine in Chennai. My brother's a famous doctor, Chennai. So I come from a family filled with doctors and philanthropists who always did work. It was there in my subconscious. The same health problem that I spoke about earlier in my thing, this is the other thing, right? Things that completely knock you off, you can either sit back and say, 'Oh, you know, why this is happening to me?' Or you can say, 'Wow, it happened to me and I was meant for something great.' No time for self-pity. So part of that no time for self-pity that I need to do things in a hurry was philanthropy and drug discovery. Drug discovery because it can go to millions and billions of people if your innovation is successful. Philanthropy because you can make a difference to 5, 10,000 people. So I want to get into philanthropy. A kind person introduced me to some good people in Chennai and I'm a co-founding trustee in CHILD for the last 19 years. And we take care of children who were initially abandoned by HIV parents. Because my father was the first doctor to attend on AIDS in India. Patient number one came to my house. So I was very proud of the fact that when nobody would touch an HIV patient with a pole, my dad risked his life. So I wanted to do something for HIV meaningful and I got this opportunity to help HIV orphans through CHILD. That has now mushroomed into something massive. We have girl children program,young boys program, residential school program.Hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of children have gone through it. And just last year,we launched a vocational training program in CHILD for girls. Right? Someday I want to bring transgenders in because in our society, a transgender can be a prostitute or a beggar. Only two things possible. Prostitution, begging. So someday, I hope I can do something for transgenders, but right now it is for girls who come from very poor background, abandoned background, they're starting to learn AI. Giving them basic introduction to computers, introduction to Tally software in accounting, get them ready for skills. I don't care about degrees. In India, degree is waste.

[01:03:58] Prakash Mallya: Right.

[01:03:59] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Today's date. We have to think like the Europeans of the 1940s and 50s where a car mechanic is paid more than a doctor in Germany.

[01:04:02] Prakash Mallya: Trade skills are so much better.

[01:04:03] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Trade skills. If she comes and I can teach her accounting, I don't care if she got BA, BCom, MA, MCom. She has it, great, good for her if she wants to. But she's going to get a job because she gets a skill. So we're getting a skill development program. So CHILD is one thing. The second thing is along some kind-hearted friends in Bangalore, we started Humanist Foundation to help poor people who will not be able to afford oncology treatment. CyteCare Hospital had the heart. To say let us create it and almost free of cost to the patient. We've done about 500 patients so far, 510 or so. I hope it also mushrooms because of a great hospital like CyteCare came on the table. We came together. Friend of mine, Jogen and myself and Dr. Farzan, Ramu and others, and we did Humanist. The third philanthropy is a science philanthropy. Where science and philanthropy come together. In India, we don't fund science. We spend the last 50 minutes talking about it. A great group of scientists around India got together and said, 'Let's do an NGO called Ignite Life Sciences.' Where we will raise money from society and fund science privately in our country. Why does funding of science have to be only from government? Right. So now we are embarked that and we're funding many projects all over the country called Ignite Life Sciences. So that is the coalition, you know, coalescing scientific interest, philanthropic interest is coming together. Think about science as a philanthropy. If I invest in a next-generation vaccine for dengue, that's the biggest philanthropy you could do. If that particularly if that medicine is available to millions of my countrymen at affordable price, what bigger philanthropy can be there? So it took me age 60 to understand that science and philanthropy can coexist. So these are the reasons why I'm in philanthropy. And again, I'll finish with what I started. I have gained much, much, much more than I can ever give back.

[01:06:09] Prakash Mallya: Wow. And I have no words to describe what you're doing. But I have an honest question, Anand. You are doing so many different things. You're a founder, you're a cancer survivor, you're a philanthropist, you've done many other things. How do you find the time?

[01:06:28] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: I work with great people. And you know, I'll be very honest. I was a man of average intellect. I know my strengths, right? Above average intellect. But I always had the skill of identifying good people to work with, whether it was my school, Don Bosco School, Madras, or Guindy Engineering College, or friends in the US or friends in Bangalore. I work with people who are 10x smarter than me. And thankfully, I am able to appreciate that they are much smarter than me and learn from them. So in all of these things I spoke about, I'm only an igniter. I bring my passion, my energy, and I try to bring my pure intent and networks. The teams that I have in Cellworks, in Bugworks, in Ignite Life Sciences, in CHILD, in Humanist, everything that we do, the teams are delivering. You know, I just, they believe in me, I believe in them. It's as cliched as it sounds. If you surround yourself with people who are smarter than me, know that they are smarter than me. I want to learn from them always, so there is no ego. Man, you unleash some amazing things. If you can just set aside your stupid ego, you can unleash amazing things. I ask the most basic questions every day, Prakash. When I go to our labs in C-CAMP, I'm sure they think I'm an idiot sometimes. I have no problem. I'm going to remain a student all my life.

[01:07:54] Prakash Mallya: Wow. Yeah. It's very, very simple what you said, but so hard to do. Yeah from what you have achieved in life, even harder to do, I would say.

[01:08:08] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Yeah. I, I believe in that.

[01:08:11] Prakash Mallya: So last question that I ask all my guests is about just future forward India. So India's position in deep tech, including areas like drug research is not only about domestic consumption or domestic growth. It's putting India on the map, right? So if you fast forward a couple of decades, what is your vision of India's position on that global map from a deep tech perspective? And what steps could we take right now in order to achieve that vision?

[01:08:47] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Beautiful. First we have the vision so we stay positive, right? And then look at what we do. As we said, our governments are trying to do their very best, given the constraints we have. We are a complex country. 20 years from today, some of the top medicines of this world in areas like cancer, diabetes, aging, infection will come to the whole world from India. It's already going to happen. Because Indians believe in affordable innovation. West is expensive innovation. We don't have that kind of money. We will never have that kind of money and we don't need that kind of money. Even Bugworks, if we are successful, I want my product to go all over the world. I want India first because they are my people. It's my brothers and sisters, but I want this innovation to go all over the world. So somebody in Botswana or somebody in in Vienna, Virginia, will say, 'Wow, Indian innovation saved my life,' right? So we are already marching towards that and I think our affordable innovation plus our manufacturing capabilities, very hard for other countries to put our manufacturing capabilities like we have particularly in vaccines, childhood illnesses. Very strong, India is. The world needs India for, you know, diphtheria and smallpox and measles vaccines. So I see a 20-year, first of all, we'll be getting closer to Viksit Bharat. So your question beautifully comes to 2047. Our honorable prime minister wants India to be a truly developed country by 2047. Correct? So I'll start from there. To be a truly developed country, I need to be healthy. If I have problems. Because innately Indians, our genes make us more prone to cardiac issues, to diabetes issues, etc, etc. So we will be the country that lead the world in many aspects. We will never be number one. I think that is too much of patriotic fervor that is not backed up with data. We will be in the top two or three. With US, China and India, right. Lots to catch up with China, as I said. And I'll come to that in a second. So I see I see in 20 years from now with artificial intelligence, with the young population coming in, with clinical trials happening in India, affordable medicines in affordable innovation in India, so many incubators, accelerators in our country, so much of manufacturing, if only the regulatory piece also improves, which is only a matter of time, nothing to beat India. Then we'll be sitting 20 years from now and saying, we won't be just talking about manufacturing alone. Manufacturing will always be important, but we'll be talking about innovation in drug discovery also coming. But to get there, schemes like the government has announced the one lakh, one lakh crore scheme, should be properly implemented. Putting a scheme and getting it funded is one thing, having the right infrastructure and committees to drive it so the right people who are working on the most important problems get this money is a second problem. I hope we put enough emphasis on the second part. Hats off to the government to do what it does. Number one. Our regulatory paradigm again. And third, big pharmaceutical industries in India and the big agro industries in India have to step up their own investment in R&D. They have to develop the ecosystem. If as a small company, I've gone around the world to develop AMR ecosystem, the big companies can do a much better job than me because they have more resources, more people, more experience. Why are they not investing in small companies? Why are they not coming and acquiring small companies? Why aren't licensing deals happening in India? So it's not just for the government to solve this problem. The industry also has to wake up to do it. And last but not least, we have to be very careful about how we integrate AI into biology and data because this involves a lot of confidential data. I think a country like India where we lack discipline, we are just an indisciplined bunch. We are a smart bunch, hardworking bunch, great culture, great history, but we are absolutely indisciplined. Which is why the British, 50,000 British took over 50 crore Indians because of our inherent indiscipline. AI will expose that indiscipline in ways that we can't even begin to fathom. All of our data could be available everywhere. All the governance around AI infrastructures, we need to get that right. So that concerns me and that is going to become a central theme, whether it's Agrotech, EV-tech, semiconductor tech, biotech, space tech. The common theme is going to become data integrity, data fidelity. We need to spend much more time on it. So I dream of a 20-year thing where many of the diseases that plague hundreds of millions of people, not just in India, but all over the world, solutions will come from India. The West cannot solve the world's problems. We will.

[01:13:47] Prakash Mallya: That's a fantastic articulation on what we can do together.

[01:13:51] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Together.

[01:13:53] Prakash Mallya: Yeah. So, we covered so much ground, Anand. Is there anything you wanted to cover that we didn't?

[01:13:58] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: I think you've, you've covered everything. It's just that I, I just want to leave your audience and and you to know that my comments are not purely coming from nationalistic, patriotic fervor. Because that will die down as soon as you walk out. It's rooted in what I see is happening, right? And I feel very fortunate that I got an opportunity to work in two very different areas. Semiconductors and biotechnology. And whatever little milestones or success I've gotten in life are because of ability to adapt. So I want youngsters listening to you to know that while there is all this LLM and AI and everything, learn one or two areas deeply. My biggest worry is now we are going to become a flitting generation. You go quickly into chat GPT, you find your answer or perplexity or whatever. You're not getting deep into anything. Take one area at least and get in-depth knowledge and be open to adaptation. And I want to leave that 20-year-old or 30-year-old watching this, if a 60-year-old can wake up every day feeling that he knows nothing, because I do know nothing, I know very little. Wants to learn and I find that AI tools are allowing me to learn new things, not just making my life easier. Big difference. AI tools making my life easier, good for all of us, but it needs to allow me to study, learn more also in depth. So that adaptability, adaptation and the thirst for knowledge is the only way we will succeed and this country will succeed.

[01:15:35] Prakash Mallya: Couldn't be a better way to close our conversation, Anand. So, thank you very much for coming.

[01:15:41] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Thank you so very much. You've done so much work. I can see it really.

[01:15:46] Prakash Mallya: Amazing, amazing conversation. You are an absolute inspiration. I'm sure for everyone listening to it would be as well. And look forward to all the success for Bugworks and your entire team that is working so hard and continuing to work so hard on the Phase One trials.

[01:16:02] Dr. Anand Anandkumar: Thank you so much. I love the Chai Chips format. And thank you, guys.

[01:16:07] Prakash Mallya: Yeah. So, for everyone listening in, please tune into any channel that you listen to our podcast or watch our podcast. Please give us feedback on how I can do better and what more or what different things you would like to listen to. Thank you.

(Outro Music)

Episode Summary:

"How do you unleash India's talent on the world's biggest problems, not just India's problems?"

This is the visionary question at the heart of my latest Chai & Chips episode with Rose Schooler.

For decades, India has been a powerhouse of engineering talent. But the next chapter isn't just about supplying talent—it's about becoming a global hub of innovation that solves critical challenges for the world. How do we make that leap?

In this conversation, Rose draws from her rewarding career at Intel and her current role on the board of Arm to lay out a powerful roadmap.

YouTube episode link:

Key Insights:

My conversation with Rose Schooler offers a masterclass in strategy, leadership, and the practical realities of building a world-class technology ecosystem.

Introduction: India's Moment of Transformation

The episode is framed by a powerful, forward-looking question: How does India unleash its immense talent on the world's biggest problems, not just its own? Rose Schooler argues that India is at an inflection point with the potential to transition from a vital talent provider to a global leader in technological innovation and governance.

1. India's Evolution - From Follower to Leader

Rose provides a unique historical perspective on India's journey within the global tech landscape.

• Past: Initially viewed as a hub for "resource augmentation" and "engineering resource allocation," where global companies offshored projects to leverage local talent.

• Present: A profound shift has occurred. India is now recognized as a "digital infrastructure leader," pioneering large-scale solutions like digital ID (Aadhaar) and payment systems (UPI). The rise of homegrown unicorns (Flipkart) and giants (Reliance Jio) signals a new era of innovation.

• The Takeaway: India's narrative has fundamentally changed from a service provider to a market that creates and leads.

2. The Three Non-Negotiables for a Thriving Ecosystem

When asked what it would take for India to build a robust semiconductor ecosystem, Rose identified three critical, non-negotiable pillars:

• Talent as the Foundation: India’s engineering talent is its greatest asset. With over 1.5 million engineering graduates annually and a significant presence in global tech leadership, the raw material is abundant.

• Innovation and Intellectual Property (IP): The ecosystem must move beyond implementation to creation. This requires a focused drive on R&D to generate and crucially, protect foundational IP. This "secret sauce" is what creates true differentiation and long-term value.

• Execution is Everything: In a powerful statement, Rose declares, "Strategy without execution is just PowerPoint." Vision, capital, and policy are meaningless without the relentless, consistent execution to bring them to life. This was a key lesson from her time at Intel, where even great ideas failed without a disciplined follow-through.

3. Navigating the Geopolitical Chessboard

Geopolitics is no longer a background factor. It is a primary driver of the semiconductor industry.

• The China+1 Opportunity: Global pressures, tariff chaos, and a strategic need for supply chain diversification are creating a massive opportunity for India.

• The Apple Example: Apple's decision to move manufacturing to India is a landmark event. Rose emphasizes that this should be viewed not as an endpoint (an assembly line) but as a launchpad for a full-stack ecosystem, from design and IP to advanced production.

• Government's Role: While government support (like the Chips Act in the US or Semiconductor Mission in India) is crucial for creating incentives, companies should not solely rely on it. A balanced approach that leverages private capital and market forces is more resilient.

4. Winning the "Talent War" - Making Engineering Cool Again

One of the most pressing challenges is attracting the next generation of bright minds to the foundational work of semiconductors.

• The AI "Brain Drain": The "giant, glowing light" of AI is pulling talent away from the core engineering that makes it possible. This is a global talent war and semiconductors risk being perceived as less glamorous.

• The Solution: Rose argues for a multi-pronged approach:

  • Change the Narrative: Make engineering "cool" again by connecting it to real-world impact—solving problems in healthcare, climate, and society.

  • Rethink Education: Create more accessible pathways into the industry, such as hands-on boot camps and trade-like roles, rather than relying solely on traditional engineering degrees.

  • Make it a Requirement: In a bold statement, she suggests that engineering should become a foundational skill in early education, positioning India to lead globally.

5. Masterclass in Leadership - Lessons from the Trenches

Rose shared deeply personal and powerful stories that serve as invaluable lessons for any professional.

• Failure is the Best Teacher: Her most profound career learnings came not from her successes, but from her failures—like receiving a "horrible" management review. These moments forced introspection and growth, teaching her to "slow down to speed up" and bring her team along.

• Act and Decide: From her early days in a fab facing a crisis alone, she learned to act decisively. This was reinforced by a mentor's advice: "When all else fails, decide." Indecision is often more damaging than a wrong decision.

• Asking for Help is a Strength: In a moment of vulnerability, she admitted that her desire to be the "ultimate problem-solver" prevented her from asking for help, jeopardizing a major project. She learned that "asking for help is a sign of strength, not a sign of weakness," and is the true essence of collaboration.

Conclusion: India’s Visionary Future

Rose concludes with an inspiring vision for India's future. As the world's largest democracy with a deep talent pool, India has the opportunity to step into a global leadership void. By leveraging its unique strengths, India can lead not only in technology but also in shaping global governance for AI, combating misinformation, and advancing human capability on a global scale.

Connect with our Guest:

• Rose Schooler on LinkedIn: RoseMary Schooler | LinkedIn

• Rose on X: Rose Schooler (@RoseSchooler) / X

Follow Chai and Chips:

• Subscribe on YouTube(Chai & Chips - YouTube), Spotify(Chai & Chips Podcast | Podcast on Spotify), Apple Podcasts(Chai & Chips Podcast - Podcast - Apple Podcasts) or your favourite podcast platform to never miss an episode.

• Leave a review—it helps us reach more listeners!

• Follow us on YouTube & LinkedIn for updates.

Episode Transcript

Intro: [00:00:00] I, I think we would be naive if we didn't say it was one of the most powerful forces at play right now. So there's a perfect example of an opportunity for India, for India specific products with Apple, that could initiate unique IP, create impetus for semiconductor development in that region. Strategy without execution is PowerPoint. But if you don't have the execution at that patient capital and that consistent policy and that commitment to the end state, if you don't have the execution, you will fail. I mean, semiconductors are freaking cool.

Prakash: [00:51:17] Welcome to Chai and Chips Show. This is a show where we interview experts around the world to share insights on what will it take to build an India ecosystem on semiconductors and deep tech. So you are one of the experts today.

Rose: [01:07:07] Oh, wow. Thank you for having me first and foremost, uh, and thank you for the uh, uh, very lovely description of expert. I guess 33 years in the industry, I get I you get to call me something, right?

Prakash: [01:23:25] Yeah, that's true. That's true. Yeah. For the benefit of our viewers, I wanted to give a quick run of introduction for you, Rose, hope that's okay?

Rose: [01:34:25] That's totally fine.

Prakash: [01:35:36] Rose Schooler is 30 year industry veteran and she started her career at Intel. She has spent over three decades, 33 years at Intel over variety of different roles, most recently being corporate VP of Data Center and AI business. VP of IoT business, Intel startup initiatives, she led that at one point in time and many other roles. And um, she serves as an independent director on the board of ARM and Densify. She is a fantastic coach and mentor, one of the mentees being yours truly. She also runs a podcast. It's called Maestro Mindset. She was talking about it and it's about how do you build career, successful careers, especially for middle management and executives. Am I right, Rose?

Rose: [02:23:56] That's right. Leadership and management,with a focus on creating a culture that, uh, you would want to not only, uh, succeed but thrive in.

Prakash: [02:35:46] Rather than jumping into questions on semiconductors, chip and deep tech, let me start with lightning round. The first question, what's one weird or surprising fact about Rose that most people won't know?

Rose: [02:50:06] back in the day, and even on occasion, now, I may bust out and rap.

Prakash: [03:01:54] Oh, really? Wow.

Rose: [03:04:47] Yep.

Prakash: [03:05:54] Okay.

Rose: [03:06:40] I I I've been known to be able to rap a bit.

Prakash: [03:11:43] My god.

Rose: [03:12:00] And and not my own raps, but I can, I can repeat some old school raps pretty well.

Prakash: [03:17:03] Nice. We should have a different show.

Rose: [03:20:13] If you give me a little prep, I, you know, I might even perform for you someday. And by the way, our friend Jay Kirkland is also a closet rapper.

Prakash: [03:30:22] Second question. An emoji that best captures your frame of mind most times?

Rose: [03:36:26] Do you know that one with the smiley face with the hearts that are flying around it? Oh, okay. Yeah. Yeah, that like, you are hard pressed to find me angry, sad, depressed, stressed these days. I am knock on wood. My desk is wood, so I'm going to use that. Uh, I'm living a pretty brilliant life right now. So, I am exceptionally happy and I think that emoji is a good representation of that happiness.

Prakash: [04:07:44] That's so wonderfully said. Yeah. Being grateful is it, that's all it takes for a happy life.

Rose: [04:14:52] Every day, my friend, I wake up and pinch myself and and thank whatever God you may pray to that uh, I have been blessed with this life.

Prakash: [04:25:22] What's the most unusual or adventurous thing you have ever done? Besides rapping.

Rose: [04:30:20] That's a good one. That's a good one. Back in the day in my 20s, I bungee jumped off of a crane in Mexico. So that was a long time ago. So I also give you a more recent one. Um, we went last year to Iceland for our 30th wedding anniversary, my husband and I. And we did an ice cave hike, which was super fun. But it was pretty late in the season. And the thing that makes it pretty adventurous is that a week later one of the ice caves collapsed and someone died. Yeah. So at the time I didn't think it was terribly adventurous. Yeah. a week after, I thought it was pretty darn adventurous.

Prakash: [05:18:43] Oh, wow. Yeah. That calls into question how quickly things can go bad.

Rose: [05:26:01] Yep. That's exactly right. That's exactly right. And I think it was just, you know, late in the season, the temperatures were starting to melt the ice a fair amount and it collapsed.

Prakash: [05:35:57] Yeah. Next one. What's a song that always gets you dancing? No matter where you are.

Rose: [05:41:48] Oh, there's so many. Um, I could go with like dancing Queen by Abba. Oh, that's a good one. To Word Up by Cameo. Um, to any old hip hop song, like Rapper's Delight, by Sugarhill Gang. It doesn't take me, take much to get me dancing. I love to dance.

Prakash: [06:07:40] Okay, last one. What's the first thing that comes to mind when I say India?

Rose: [06:13:30] I'm gonna give you two answers on this one. Uh, the first thing I would say is talent. And I think because of the nature of this podcast, most listeners would think I meant engineering talent, and I do. But I also will add to that talent comment, by reflecting on the question that you just asked about dancing. Because one of the talents that I did not realize was so pervasive in India was dancing.

Prakash: [06:49:10] That's true.

Rose: [06:50:33] Now, I've seen enough Bollywood to know that there's some good very skilled dancers in India. So don't get me wrong. Yeah. But I will tell a story of our last face to face sales conference, Prakash. I believe we met in Malta for the Asia Pac conference. Yeah. And they busted out some Indian music. And the dance floor erupted.

Prakash: [07:20:25] Yeah.

Rose: [07:20:57] And I still watched those videos today because I I was so blown away from, one, the dance floor is usually like filled with women. And in this case, we were in the minority and you guys just like took over the dance floor. And so again, to summarize, talent, not only technical, Yeah. but also the arts.

Prakash: [07:43:58] Yes, that's true.

Rose: [07:46:17] I will never forget that my friend, as long as I live. I was blown away. You dudes were cutting the rug, man. It was awesome.

Prakash: [07:55:54] All right. So, we are done with lightning round. So let me start with it's, it's, you talked about talent, India having engineering talent and uh, also dancing talent. But let me wind it back to you spent a long time at Intel, right? And now you're on the board of Arm and Densify. You've had very extensive experience and you have a global vantage point. So, the thing I wanted to ask you is, from your lens, where was India perceived few years back? How is it perceived now? What changes do you see and what makes you come to that conclusion?

Rose: [08:42:30] Sure. if I go back to I would say what would be my first introduction to India, uh, when I was at Intel. Uh, the things that come to mind were resource augmentation, engineering resource allocation, building up sites to again, bring the engineering. and I keep using that word because again, that was the lens. It was like, how do I use the local resource to augment or offshore projects or opportunities within a company that could have been HQ'd or headquartered someplace else in the globe? The thing that I think has really shifted and and by the way, I did that. You know, I did that. I did some of my first IP development for wireless in India. I had created IP, some blocks, IP capability in blocks there. but having said that, as I kind of look in how things evolved, what I saw was a transition from outsource resource augmentation, engineering to really a digital infrastructure leader. One that created a set of capabilities around whether it be digital IT, ID or payment systems, storage and access technologies. And I think no matter the example, what it showed was India's ability to lead in tech. And then you saw, you know, again, you would go back and you'd look at some of the big global service providers that are based in India, the Tatas of the world, as an example. And then I'll never forget Prakash, and I think the conversation was with you. And you said, Rose, we've got this, you know, unicorn that's popping up called Flipkart. Yeah. And we've got this, telco and cloud provider called Reliance. So it's really that shift to summarize, it's really that shift from resource provider and engineering augmentation mentality to a real tech leader. And I think the shift has been profound.

Prakash: [11:13:58] Yeah. We have come a long way. I would agree with that. And a follow on question in that regard would be, you've seen ecosystems being built. This show is all about sharing insights on how do we build strong ecosystems. So, from where India is today, if you were to build a very robust ecosystem, what are some of the non-negotiables? What are two or three things that we absolutely have to do right?

Rose: [11:44:49] Yeah, I think that's a great question, and I think we hit some of it, at the beginning when I was talking about talent in the speed round, right? Um, India has tremendous talent. And you know, I can say that easily based on experience, but I wanted to bring some data to the conversation. So I went and I started doing some research and I found some super interesting factoids if you will. 10, greater than 10% of the Fortune 500 companies have CEOs of India descent. There's over a million and a half engineering grads annually. Over 70, approximately 75% of the H1B visas in the U. S. annually come from India. And number three in the world, you know, I mentioned the Flipkart example, but number three in the world in unicorn startups. So there's, there's a tremendous amount of what I believe is the foundational asset, which is talent. Uh, we just talked about transitioning from augmentation and talent availability to true innovation, um, and R& D. So in along with that talent, you need to have the inner drive to create, innovate and, and focus and prioritize research and development. And with that, when you create the innovation, you need to generate and protect the IP that comes with it. So I think that's super critical. From an ecosystem, this is a generally an ecosystem question, but if you're focusing now, I'm going to kind of auger in a little bit more on semiconductors, but relationships with tool providers and process providers to then take the talent with the R& D and create the IP, but then take it one step further into product. Have channel partnerships to get products to market, um, and then the robust supply chains that come with being a silicon provider. Now, one thing that we didn't touch on and this I think this really, really increases the complexity. If you want to be what we used to call at Intel an IDM, an integrated device manufacturer, then you have to have your own process technology and capability. And I think that raises the bar substantially because you have material management and wafers and gases and chemicals and masks and other types of tools. You have to have country infrastructure on clean power and water. And all of that needs to provide an ability to scale at the unit demands required to be successful in a silicon and semiconductor market. And as you know, Prakash, you know, to build a factory today, a leading edge fab costs, you know, 25, 30 billion dollars. I think TSMC spent on two nanometer in Taiwan. So it comes with a tremendous amount of capital expense if you choose to go that next step and manufacture your own silicon in country.

Prakash: [15:24:08] Capital expense is one of the most important things, but as you highlighted, there are several other aspects including talent, which would be important for India to consider as we build a robust chip or deep tech ecosystem.

Rose: [15:39:46] Absolutely. And just one more comment on kind of the the manufacturing attributes of that semiconductor ecosystem and capability. If you look at the VC community traditionally in India, my perspective, and please correct me if you see this differently, is that it's been a lot of B2C and a lot of SaaS companies. When you talk about that transition into semiconductors, you also, do you have the investment community behind you? Is there incentive to keep the expertise in company? Is there government focus on creating a semiconductor capability in country. You know, you've seen a bunch of that most recently, like the example I would give is in the US with the CHIPS Act. And what's your startup community look like? I I know you have a few, but is that enough to really drive what I'd call IP and design all the way out through manufacturing and product delivery, or at what point do you decide that you not, you don't want to be a device manufacturer? And then it just requires that you leverage relationships and create relationships with the folks like Samsung and TSMC.

Prakash: [16:56:49] Yeah, agree. But there's one aspect you mentioned, I wanted to dig into, right? IP, intellectual property. Yes, India has, like you mentioned as well, huge amount of talent. One in five chip designers in the world today are based in India, but most of them work for multinational companies that have footprint in India, including folks like Intel, like you talked about. But my question is, the foundational IP is still very lean in India. So how important do you believe IP is if you were to build a robust ecosystem? And are there strengths and opportunities that India can leverage on based on its capabilities to build IP?

Rose: [17:38:29] Yeah, I personally, and I, I'd be super interested to hear your thoughts on this, you know, with all your history in the industry. But I think IP is foundational. Uh, and when I say that, I think we all know, at least if you're in this semiconductor industry, that there's what I would call readily available IP. You know, some IO blocks, etc, that you can easily buy from standard IP providers, where there isn't a tremendous amount of value add, but looking at where you're leading in innovation and R& D, how can you create some differentiated IP blocks that allow you to have, you know, what we used to call it Prakash as your secret sauce, your differentiation within that product. We said this, the talent's there, the intent's there, but how do you bring that execution together? So I've built my foundational IP, which is critical. How do I bring government, private enterprises, and universities together to really create momentum, around what I would call a pretty strategic in-country goal? I don't know, what are your thoughts on this one?

Prakash: [19:03:13] The part that you mentioned about collaboration across the industry, academic institutions, VCs, in fact, the entire ecosystem is so critical. and from everything I've read on the valley side, there are so many companies, Sun Microsystems long time back, Google a little more recently, and Tesla far more recently, are companies that either got built in campus or had a very close collaboration with academia as they built their IP. So,absolutely. in fact, I was having the conversation with Dr. Mittal who is the first employee of Wipro's IT business, set up R&D for Wipro and he talked about how the initial part of Wipro's journey was very close collaboration with Indian Institute of Science, one of the premier research and R&D institutions in India. So there is immense logic in having a very close collaboration across the industry and academic institutions. A follow on question, Rose, would be, you talked about foundational IP and from your position as an independent board member of Arm and industry experience across Intel, do you believe that India's access to some of the core IP, whether it's x86, or whether it's ARM, or RISC-V, or having building such IP in the country would be important? Do you see successes, or do you see case studies across the world where India can learn from?

Rose: [20:40:48] Yeah, that's a really good question. Um, I think generally for the IP created in country to start in from a position where there is a key industry that's critical to India's infrastructure, commerce, etc. is a great place to kind of build capability and have differentiation that you know will be consumed within your country. When you start talking about the core CPU decision, I often think that that's one that's industry determined, going, very similar to the comment that I just gave around what IP could be created in, in India for India, and you've seen China do some of that, right? You've seen China do a lot of that. Yeah.but getting back to the core IP discussion and decision, the cores, and you know this, and I'm sure many of your listeners do as well, the cores required for data center are at a different performance, MIPS per watt per dollar metric than a core that you would use for an edge IoT device, as an example. Yeah. So I think first you have to look at the availability based on your market requirements for performance, power, and price point. Right. Um, and then I think you drive your IP decision from there. And an example that I would give you, and I don't know if you saw this, but recently, the Malaysian government secured a strategic licensing, licensing, excuse me, partnership with Arm. And I would imagine you would see more of these deals. And for obvious reasons, I am a fan of the Arm portfolio, as you noted, I'm on the board and I should make that super clear. But I don't see why you wouldn't see more of these opportunities in country. Leveraging different cores, including the Arm core, like we saw in Malaysia.

Prakash: [22:50:52] So I have a follow on question on the Malaysia collaboration that you talked about on Arm. What is that? What, what, what makes it unique?

Rose: [23:03:57] I think and again, I, I will share what has been obviously shared in the news, but it's generically a strategic licensing partnership. So access to the ARM core, which I think as I noted earlier, I don't see why we wouldn't see more of that internationally. Again, just to be very, very clear, I am not sharing any confidential information. I am unaware of other deals. This is Rose's opinion that it would make a lot of sense that if a country wants to create products for India, made in India, or for China, made in China, and, you know, the list goes on and on, that that type of model wouldn't continue.

Prakash: [23:56:58] Now, the other aspect about semiconductors and semiconductors are in news a lot now. you and I are very close to the industry, but for even the other folks, geopolitics is so much intertwined with semiconductors. So companies make decisions on which countries or which regions to take a bet on from an R&D, design, manufacturing point of view, from a chip making point of view. And it applies for India as well. There is China plus one strategy of diversification that many companies are pursuing today. So how important does geopolitics as a criteria play in the minds or in the decision making of executives as they make a call on which regions to invest in?

Rose: [24:50:49] Wow. I think we would be naive if we didn't say it was one of the most powerful forces at play right now. As I mentioned earlier, in the prior administration in the US, it was the the genesis and the force behind the CHIPS Act. People realized that having access to semiconductors is a national asset these days. Andrelying on other nations for that capability creates risk. So, you know there's definitely a need for countries to own those critical assets, and semis is one of them. So I think that's been, I think that's very clear, a non controversial statement. Having said that, I do think that there are areas that it needs to be targeted. I really, really despise the idea of an isolationist economy. And let me expand on that. I'm a super simple person, Prakash. I like things is boiled down as simply as possible. Global means big TAM. Right. Isolated/nationalist equals small TAM. If I'm the CEO of a company, why would I pick a small TAM? So, especially if you're going to go into the manufacturing of devices because of the capital expense, you need the scale, the economies of scale to offset the investment of that capital. So again, if I go back to yes, it's critical. I do believe it should be targeted. And let me just give you an example of what I mean by that. If there's critical assets around defense, if there's critical capabilities around even some of the what I'd call high risk telecommunications infrastructure might be something you'd want to think about because bad actors could play a pretty nasty role in your telecommunications infrastructure. There may be opportunities for unique IP, public, private, university relationships that allows the incubation and the creation of that semiconductor capability. Another instance of geopolitics and I think we've both seen this play out. I it's probably been about 30 days ago now. But I don't think it's a big secret. There's a lot of tariff chaos that's still lingering between the US and many, many of our partner nations. It's having an impact to companies' bottom lines. It's causing a rerouting of global supply chains and trade relations and in some cases, it's damaging decades of goodwill. And the example that I think we probably both saw for Prakash was the request to get manufacturing out of China. Yeah. Apple says, great. I'll move it to India. So there's a perfect example of an opportunity for India for India specific products with Apple that could initiate unique IP, create impetus for semiconductor development in that region. Yes, the move initially is device manufacturing, but that doesn't preclude extending the relationship to more semiconductor and IP development in the future.

Prakash: [28:54:33] So you start somewhere and build from there?

Rose: [28:57:48] Yes. Yes. Absolutely. And when I look at India, you know, we talked about the design talent, 20% of the design talent is in India. Huge R&D centers. Yeah. If people are using the U. S. as an example, looking to get out of China, India is a perfect landing spot. There's increased government focus as I understand. I'm sure you know more about Semcon India than I do. But the government focus is starting to kick up. And it creates a great diplomatic hedge.

Prakash: [29:33:04] Yeah. Yeah, I agree. I think a lot has happened, a lot more can happen in the semiconductor and deep tech space in India, but yeah, there are a lot of actions in progress, Rose. I agree to that. And I would ask you another related question in that space is, as you look at the geopolitics play out and I believe investment as you build the ecosystem of global players in India, whether it's global capability centers, design centers, you name it, is very critical. So what are two or three critical factors that India needs to consistently demonstrate for us to attract investment from these global semiconductor or deep tech players?

Rose: [30:21:49] Yeah and let me just tell you my point of reference is just kind of watching some of the degradation of that in the US right now. I think it's really important to have predictable, trusted policy and IP protection. Yeah, I'm in agreement with that. If people are going to bring investment money into a country, they want to make sure that the, whatever is benefited out of that investment can be guaranteed in the form of return, that there isn't, you know, some kind of government funny business that puts that return at risk. So I think that predictable, trusted policy and IP protection. So if I go to India, or if a company starts in India, either scenario, and there's IP generation there, can I make sure that that IP is protected? That would be another thing. And then finally, like how do you make sure you're continuing to retain design talent? Yeah and then build talent, if you go down the manufacturing avenue in process technology, packaging, and manufacturing ecosystems.

Prakash: [31:39:27] And you talked about across building capability on top of the talent that you have, building manufacturing capability. The Apple example of moving from China to India being one of them. And associated tools and uh, IP that is coming through to build more and more capable systems on our own as India. The other aspect of it would be what could we learn from similar ecosystems around the world? And that's where again, you have had a global vantage point. You can see Silicon Valley right close to your backyard. Across Valley, Israel, Taiwan, Korea, China, they've had great examples of ecosystem building with long term in mind. So are there broad themes that you saw are valuable for India? There are some cautionary tales that you would like to highlight as we build the ecosystem for deep tech and semiconductors.

Rose: [32:43:40] Sure. I'm going to give you one of my favorite sayings Prakash and it's strategy without execution is PowerPoint.

Prakash: [32:54:14] That's true.

Rose: [32:55:00] Or, you know, whatever tool you use, if you're at Amazon, maybe it's a Word document. And what I mean by that is you can have the best vision. You can have private, public and university partnerships aligned. You can have the capital, but if you don't have the execution at that patient capital and that consistent policy and that commitment to the end state, if you don't have the execution, you will fail. And, you know, I hate to use these examples, but I will. Like, if you look at outsourcing our fab capability at Intel, as an example, creating that foundry business that Pat was very passionate about. Right. You know that it wasn't the first time that strategy had been attempted. Yeah. So where did we fall down previously? Execution. So, you know, we, we take the second or third swing at it. And I think the industry is still waiting for that proof of execution. So, I can't say it enough that you can have the vision, you can have the capital, you can have the policy, but if you don't have the execution, it doesn't, nothing matters. And you can see a company like NVIDIA now that's executing the daylights out of everybody and just continuing to build better, more powerful, more available products, ecosystems, relationships, and industries. I'm a big fan of ecosystems. I think especially in the case where we're talking about semiconductors, the idea of the large capital expenditures, it's really a hard business to go into and immediately jump into the manufacturing. So if you're not going to do that, you have to be a fan of ecosystems. And with that, you got to have win-win relationships. You've got to have collaboration if you're not going to have vertical integration. And with the complexity of the semiconductor market, a balanced approach can really accelerate that progress and drive innovation by enabling a full ecosystem. I mean, you look at some of the most valuable companies in the world right now, whether it be, a Microsoft or whether it be an NVIDIA, they have really strong robust ecosystems. NVIDIA is not an IDM. NVIDIA has driven their success through in partnership with TSMC. And then the final thing that I would probably put forward as a cautionary tale is as I've watched the ebbs and flows of the CHIPS Act, it's great to engage, but not to solely rely on government funding. You remember back in the day Prakash, I would say it was I don't know, 2021, when everybody started rattling their swords if you will around the CHIPS Act. and we went all in at Intel. When I say we, I mean at Intel. We went all in. Meaning we were investing in some shape or form of manufacturing capability in the US, in Europe, in Asia. Some of which was partially funded by us. By leveraging a lot of the cash that we had built and the rest was built upon the CHIPS Act. Administrations change, the future of it becomes very tenuous, and then go back to point one. If you can't execute, your strategy will fail. So it's great to have the engagement and the support, but I wouldn't solely rely on government funding as a path to success.

Prakash: [37:20:25] That's a great insight. And across all the points you made, I'm reminded of Andy Grove time and again, execution is the only thing that matters.

Rose: [37:32:37] That's right. That's right.

Prakash: [37:34:39] Some of the themes I took away, based on your response was execution matters, absolutely. If you have a vision and long term in mind, it would be zero if you can't execute. Collaboration is critical, patient capital is critical, and the patient capital part is definitely an area where India can do better in my view. And you also talked about how relying purely on government may not be the best strategy in all cases. So we came a long way talking about semiconductor ecosystem, what it takes, foundational IP and why IP is important, and several other insights from your side, Rose. Let me switch gears. One of the mission for Chai and Chips also is to inspire the next generation in India to take on or build for semiconductor and deep tech. So you have spent your entire life in this industry. And if you look now ahead, 10, 15, 20 years, what excites you the most about this industry? Why would or why should a person just fresh off the college or early stage of his or her career join this industry?

Rose: [38:54:13] Wow. This is a tough one.And what I might say might be a, a just a tish, a tad controversial, but it might be one of the biggest challenges in a successful execution. So let me just, let me just give you some data there's 100, based on a McKinsey study in 2022, there's about 120,000 engineering degrees annually in semiconductor related fields, but only about a percent and a half of them actually enter that industry. In the United States, they have a substantial number of engineering students and only a small fraction enter the semiconductor market as an example. In Taiwan, as the data indicated, there's about 65,000 engineering degrees with about 2,000 to 2,500 entering semi. So it's a better percentage. Higher than most countries, and that's with somebody like TSMC in country. And they're even seeing a growing talent gap. So let's extrapolate that maybe to India. If there's 600,000 in semi-related engineering degrees, let's say that 6,000 in semi-design roles. So it's still pretty low alignment and you can see a shortage of what I would call aligned talent. So you're kind of starting in a very, very difficult position. So then the question is, which I think your question was, but I just wanted to kind of create the foundation, which is how do you pivot more of that talented engineering talent towards semis when there's this giant glowing light on the hill called AI?

Prakash: [41:12:07] That's true.

Rose: [41:13:58] And I have to tell you, I'm not sure I know the answer to that question. University targeted programs are one thing that I would throw out as an idea. Maybe changing requirements such that some of the roles are more trade like versus engineering degreed in approach. Boot camps, hands on training and then everybody needs, everybody needs that kind of star on the hill. So what's the vision that says by joining, going down this path of semiconductors, I have an opportunity to win. Win in terms of a growing career. And and maybe in hindsight as we talk through this, that might be part of the sales pitch if you will. That you know, because of it's a blossoming opportunity in India, there's opportunities quicker for leadership roles. So I just think that you've got to really think through the types of skills and how you expand the pool. Reference my trade like versus degreed like careers, hands on training and boot camps early in high school, and bring out the cool factor. I mean, semiconductors are freaking cool. It's a lot of science and a lot of art. And when you think about the densities and the process technology, I think we have lost the insight and the visibility to how incredibly cool semiconductors are, and we need to bring that back.

Prakash: [43:10:39] It is very interesting, Rose, and you would agree with what I say is semiconductors were boring for a long period of time until AI came along. And then it's boom. Suddenly everybody's talking semiconductors, but it is always one of the most magical things human beings have invented.

Rose: [43:29:43] Oh, it's incredible. When I was coming out of school, a really, really, really long time ago, they were like, they were like the cool kid on the block. Semis were super cool. And then they became kind of matter of fact, and you began to take them for granted. And now I don't know, why don't we start by pointing to the fact that and this changes almost every day these days, but one of the top two, if not the top valued company in the world is a semiconductor company.

Prakash: [44:04:40] And that brings me to you alluded to you joining the industry few decades back. What made you join semiconductors at that time?

Rose: [44:17:34] And Prakash, I don't, I think you saw this presentation. I, I used to give it actually quite often at Intel in the industry and it was, you know, basically Steel Town to Silicon Valley. So you know my background is I grew up in a really, really small town. I think the population now is about 8,000 people. Maybe it was 35,000 at the top end when the steel industry was really thriving. But you know, I went to college to be a doctor. I had every intention to be a doctor. And I took a few biology classes and I was just bored. And I thought, what's something that's up and coming and cool? And I stumbled into Intel. I didn't stumble into semiconductors. I didn't even know what a semiconductor was. I stumbled into Intel. And I thought the products they created and what they were doing in terms of improving life and society was just mind boggling. So that's what was really inviting to me. It was innovative. It had an impact. It had a ton of opportunity because there were only 27,000 people at the company at the time. So that, that's what and and then probably the least significant, but also worth noting is that they were on the West coast and I was cold and I didn't want to live on the East coast anymore. So it was personally very interesting to get me out of the cold weather. So that was probably the last, the straw that broke the camel's back if you will.

Prakash: [46:08:04] Yeah. Yeah. You're so right that when you're people, especially starting off in your career, you would like to join somewhere where you make an impact and somewhere where the surface area of luck, as they call it, is very large. So you can make a difference. and you can learn from it. Yeah. So from there, you grew across variety of different leadership roles, and now you're on the board of ARM. And from your journey, and this is also one of the core reasons why we are doing this podcast is to inspire diversity in tech. So, from your lens, what more can be done to promote women across tech, um, elevate them to leadership positions, and especially from a lens of a country like India, which has so much diverse talent.

Rose: [47:09:41] So much diverse talent and some of the best and brightest I have ever worked with. So that's a really good question, Prakash. and I think one of the things that I have always said, and whether it be I was part of an organization called NCWIT, National Center of Women in Technology. They have, there has to be an effort to make engineering cool again. And I think, and I don't know what, why this is the case and I'm not trying to stereotype by any means. But I think boys are naturally attracted to engineering as an opportunity and a career. I have a daughter. I tried so hard, so hard to get her into engineering. Okay. And I failed. I failed. She's in finance. Which is, you know, it's not a bad career. But the crazy thing is, is what she ended up doing in finance is she builds these really, really complex financial models that in this day and age, you would call coding basically. I mean, it's not much a very different skill set, but somehow I couldn't translate the fun of that problem solving to an interest that would excite her. I failed. So maybe I'm not a great person to ask this question to. But at the end of the day, I think if we made a conscious effort to work on that translation of problem solving enables this sort of impact. And you could tie it into, you know, you know, all people are motivated differently. Some people are motivated by emotion. Some people are motivated by data. Some people are motivated by money, but being super specific on the inspirational efforts of that problem solving, I think would go a long way. And the second thing that I would say is that with the with the emergence and growth and scale of AI, there really isn't many industries that won't be touched by AI. and by engineering. So for me, I think it should be a foundational skill. Now, there will be some things that I don't think will be replaced. Like you go in to get your car, the body shop to get your car repaired. I think it's gonna be a real long time before you see robotics and AI in that environment. So if you're plumbing breaks in your house, you, a plumber has to drive his car out and fix the plumbing or the air conditioning. So I think there's some fields that are a little bit insulated from that. But generally, if you're in enterprise, if you're in tech, um, engineering will be a foundational requirement, um, and should be treated as such in early education.

Prakash: [50:43:24] Make engineering cool. Love it.

Rose: [50:46:18] One is make engineering cool, and two is make engineering a requirement.

Prakash: [50:52:03] India can definitely take advantage of it.

Rose: [50:57:48] And by the way, you could lead in it.

Prakash: [51:00:27] Yeah, agree. Agree. We have the skills.

Rose: [51:03:07] Like I don't think you would see that in the United States. I do think you could see that in India. Our education system is 50 years old, right? Our education, our education system was built on an infrastructure and the economy that is way different than today's and has never been updated and I think there is a giant overhaul that's required, but that's a whole another podcast in itself.

Prakash: [51:26:47] There is an opportunity for India to leapfrog with you.

Rose: [51:29:48] Yeah. Oh, absolutely. Absolutely.

Prakash: [51:32:46] So reflecting back on your career, Rose, what were your main takeaways? What advice would you have, especially for women, if they are starting off or they are in their career journey that you learned? What were your turning points? What were your major milestones? Basically I'm asking what were your like big highlights and advice?

Rose: [51:58:32] Yeah, and I'm going to answer this a little differently. and because highlights, I could like rip off a series of things that me and my team were a part of that will stay with me until, you know, I'm on my deathbed. They were so close to my heart. But I'm going to answer it in a way where that you first asked it, which were what are the events that were most consequential? So if you're okay with me going in that direction, because I think they had more impact than the achievements. Yeah. The first one, I was a young engineer. I was working in the fab. So I was a semiconductor girl, like true like inside out. Like I had a bunny suit on. and it was a Friday afternoon at about 4:30 and I had just started. So everybody else probably left early and went to happy hour or something, but I was afraid to, so I was still in the factory, still in my bunny suit. And I left and I went up to the office and I sat down and started to get my desk ready to go home for the weekend. And the factory manager came up to me and he said, we just had a run card, which was the instruction set for the process technology, fall into an acid bay. That is a serious safety issue. I want all of those run cards for the process that we're qualifying, because they were big and floppy and they didn't fit in the in the slot very well. I want them off the floor and I don't want a single misprocessing. And I looked around and it was like me, myself, and I. Like, so I had nobody to ask. I had no idea what to do. And the lesson was I just acted. I went down, you're going to die. I took a pen and some sticky notes so I wouldn't lose traceability, and I labeled all those lot boxes and I cleared out all those cards. And worked with the manufacturing supervisor to make sure that he knew where everything was so we could print new run cards and get them back in processing. So that was a big lesson on acting. You just act. And then later in my career, I would augment that with when I worked for a gentleman by the name of Doug Davis. He would always tell me when all else fails decide. And that was a quality that I saw lacking in my final years at Intel. There were very few people that were willing to take the risk to make a decision because they were afraid of what the implications would be if they weren't successful on their personal careers. And I learned from that day in the fab through the first CPU that I built with my team, not me personally, but my team built, to working with Doug Davis that decision making was a real skill. And it drove a lot of accountability. The other thing was I'll give you one more example and it was a leadership and management example. So that was kind of a skill set. This is leadership and management. I was a GM and I was a GM that would get like great management scores. Remember we would do those scorecards? And they were, they were always really good. And I got a setback and they were horrible, absolutely horrible. And um, I cried. Like I sat in my cube and I cried. Like I was mortified. And I finally found someone, like I took me a long time because you have the sessions with your team and you get not the honest feedback, but after a series of conversation, I found a few folks that told me that I was moving too quickly and leaving people behind. Yeah. So I didn't slow down to speed up. And then I ended up working for a guy by the name of Kirk Skaugen, who used to say that frequently, which is, sometimes you've got to slow down to speed up, to bring people along with you. So the moral of both of those stories is the things that stayed with me were the learnings from my failures or times where I felt outside of my comfort zone. So you will have successes in your career. But the failures will be, the failures and the movement out of your comfort zone will be the ones that imprint you and help you grow the most.

Prakash: [57:04:42] Awesome stories. And you're so right that when you're dealing with challenges, your head space is I have to get out of it as fast as possible. But reflecting back on the toughest situations is sometimes you will, at least it has held true for me is I learned the maximum from those rather than the positive ones.

Rose: [57:30:31] Absolutely. And can I get can I just give you one more really quickly?

Prakash: [57:34:03] Absolutely. Yeah, sure.

Rose: [57:35:10] Because the class I teach, we actually do an exercise on this. Do not be afraid to ask for help. We were building this Nehalem class, member Nehalem, Prakash? We were building this Nehalem class CPU and we, the design team like crushed it, but we were having troubles with validation. And Doug Davis asked me one really important question. It was one, I've cried three times at work. I'm going to tell you about two of them. He asked me, did you ask for help? And I was like, oh my God. I let my desire to not, to be to my team, the ultimate problem solver, impact our ability as an organization to be successful. And I didn't. So, collaboration means asking for help. Asking for help is a sign of strength. It's not a sign of weakness.

Prakash: [58:32:38] Yeah, agree.

Rose: [58:34:00] That would be the other thing that I would say if I were telling people about things that imprinted my career, that would be the third one.

Prakash: [58:42:15] So we have come a long way, Rose. We started with rapid fire. We did semiconductor ecosystem. We did women in tech. We talked about foundational IP and so many other aspects including your career journey. Now this is the last question that I plan to ask all my guests. India's semiconductor and deep tech ecosystem journey is not only about domestic growth. It's about our place in the global technology landscape. So fast forward 10, 15, 20 years, what are the profound ways you believe India's success in building this ecosystem will have either in reshaping the global technology landscape or advancing human capability?

Rose: [59:28:43] Sure. Oh, and I love when I get an opportunity to just postulate and dream. So I would start by saying, as I very much appreciate India's role as the world's leading, largest, largest democracy. And with that comes tenants of how you work, how you innovate, and how you collaborate. So, as I sit in a country right now where some of those similar tenants as we are parallel in both being democracies and in the US of some of those democratic tenants are being tested, you have an opportunity on a global stage to take what I think is a huge leadership position. We've mentioned this a couple times. You have an incredibly large, deep talent pool. How can you unleash that talent on some of the world's biggest problems, not just India's problems? Now, we and I want to be clear, I realize that when we talked about semiconductors, I was very specific on how to begin with differentiation needed and required by India. But now you've let me dream. So I'm going to say, how do you unleash that talent on some of the global problems? And I'm not saying ignore profitability. How do you take a leadership position in misinformation? Right. Divide. Global governance. Social connection. Mental health. The environment is one that people always talk about. But I think, a void has been created, is starting to be created is maybe a better way to say it. And India is in a position based on its talent to step in and lead from a global perspective. Second, can you drive a collection of like-minded nations to be front footed on some of the governance for AI, such that it's used for good and not overtaken by bad actors? And then I should close with semis. India has the opportunity to focus world leading, relevant engineering base and unison with government focus and ecosystem development to really begin to take a position in the global semiconductor market.

Prakash: [01:02:31:39] Fantastic. That's a very inspiring way to close our conversation, Rose.

Rose: [01:02:37:44] Thank you for the opportunity, Prakash.

Prakash: [01:02:39:46] Wishing you the very best. And for our listeners, please subscribe to our show in whichever channel you watch it. And look forward to hearing back your feedback on how I can do better. Thank you.

Episode Summary:

He was the first hire of Wipro's IT business. What happened next shaped India's tech destiny.

Imagine the early 1980s in India—an environment where building hardware was nearly impossible. It was here that a young visionary, Dr. Sridhar Mitta, joined Wipro as the very first hire of its nascent IT division.

He wasn't just building a company - he was building an industry.

In the inaugural episode of my new podcast, Chai & Chips, I had the honour of sitting down with the legend himself to uncover the untold stories behind India's technological rise.

YouTube episode link:

Key Insights:

The inaugural episode of "Chai & Chips" with Dr. Sridhar Mitta is more than a history lesson; it's a foundational masterclass in building a world-class technology industry from the ground up against improbable odds. Dr. Mitta’s journey from being the first employee of Wipro’s IT business to a celebrated social entrepreneur provides a living blueprint filled with timeless principles for today's innovators.

The conversation reveals several key themes crucial for India's ambition to become a deep tech leader.

1. Innovation Thrives Under Constraint, Driven by Integrity

The early 1980s in India were defined by the "License Raj," a period of stifling regulation that made building anything, especially technology, a monumental task. Dr. Mitta’s stories paint a vivid picture of this era, not as a barrier, but as a crucible that forged creativity.

• The "Design & Drawings" Hack: Faced with a government that didn't even have a category to approve the import of software, Wipro ingeniously classified their crucial operating system as "design and drawings." This wasn't just a clever workaround, it was a solution rooted in finding an ethical and legal path forward.

• The Customs Officer and the Nail: The hilarious yet telling anecdote of a customs officer confiscating their first batch of imported floppy disks by putting a nail through them highlights the profound lack of technological understanding they had to navigate.

• Insight for Today: For today's founders, this is a powerful reminder that the biggest obstacles often demand the most creative, principle-driven solutions. True innovation isn't just about technology. It's about navigating and reshaping the ecosystem itself.

2. Strategic Foresight: The Bet on Open Systems and Microprocessors

While global giants like IBM were heavily invested in proprietary mainframes and minicomputers, Dr. Mitta saw a different future. His decision to build Wipro’s systems on the emerging microprocessor technology was a pivotal, company-defining bet.

• Vertical vs. Horizontal: Dr. Mitta clearly explains the industry's shift from "vertical" (one company controls everything) to "horizontal" (components from different vendors create a system). He recognized that this shift would democratize computing, reduce costs, and eliminate customer lock-in.

• The Power of Ecosystems: By choosing Intel processors and a licensed operating system, Wipro wasn't just building a computer; it was plugging into a nascent but powerful global ecosystem. This allowed them to build a world-class machine in less than a year.

• Insight for Today: This underscores the importance of not just inventing technology, but also understanding and leveraging tectonic shifts in the industry. Identifying the right platform—be it RISC-V, open-source AI models, or the next big architectural shift—is as critical as the invention itself.

3. Building a World-Class R&D Culture from Scratch

Dr. Mitta’s most enduring legacy at Wipro is arguably the formidable R&D culture he established. He built this on a foundation of deep technical competence, customer-centricity, and strategic global partnerships.

• The High-Stakes Bet on Talent: The decision to invest 3 crore rupees (75% of the entire annual R&D budget) in building an in-house VLSI chip design capability was audacious. He recognized that owning the core design competency was non-negotiable for long-term success.

• From Cost Center to Profit Center: He transformed R&D from a necessary expense into a profit-generating powerhouse, creating the "India Development Center" (IDC) model long before it became the industry standard (ODC/GCC).

• A Culture of Quality: By pursuing and achieving global quality standards like ISO 9000 and CMM Level 5, Wipro R&D built trust and credibility with international clients, proving that world-class quality could be delivered from India.

• Insight for Today: Deep tech success isn't just about a single product; it's about building a sustainable, talent-rich organization. Investing in people, processes, and a customer-first mindset is the only way to build an institution that lasts.

4. The Second Act: Technology as a Tool for Social Impact.

After a storied career, Dr. Mitta didn't retire; he pivoted. His co-founding of NextWealth, a for-profit social enterprise, demonstrates a profound commitment to using technology as a force for good.

• Solving the Right Problem: Recognizing that gainful employment is a root solution to many social challenges, NextWealth focuses on creating high-tech jobs for graduates in small towns.

• Empowering Women: By bringing jobs to where the talent is, NextWealth removes the barrier of migration, creating significant opportunities for women who might otherwise be unable to join the workforce.

• Insight for Today: Dr. Mitta’s journey shows that the ultimate purpose of technology and entrepreneurship can be to create a more inclusive and equitable society. For innovators in India, this model of building a profitable business with a deep social conscience is both inspiring and achievable.

Dr. Mitta’s conversation is a testament to the power of a single individual's vision to shape the destiny of an industry and a nation. His story is a foundational text for anyone looking to build the next chapter of India's deep tech journey.

Connect with our Guest:

• Dr Sridhar Mitta on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sridhar-mitta/

Follow Chai and Chips:

• Subscribe on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts or your favorite podcast platform to never miss an episode.

• Leave a review—it helps us reach more listeners!

• Follow us on YouTube & LinkedIn for updates.

Full Episode Transcript:

Prakash Mallya: (00:00) When it comes to examples of companies or people who have built core technology, whether it's chips, AI, robotics, and so on, we always turn to Silicon Valley. It is true, there are several companies who have risen from Silicon Valley to change the trajectory of technology, but I believe that there are enough examples of people from India who have made impact at a world stage.

(00:33) We have one such visionary in our midst today. He started his career at ECIL Hyderabad where he was involved in national projects across space and defense. He was the first employee of Wipro's IT business and later became the Global Technology Officer for Wipro and was instrumental in shaping Wipro's journey to become a global technology powerhouse. Not only that, he built a very strong R&D culture within Wipro, and he has been a role model for the rest of the industry to follow.

(01:12) Beyond that, he has also ventured into NextWealth entrepreneurs, which is the most recent venture he co-founded, which is a social cause providing gainful employment for graduates in small towns with a special focus on women. And across all the achievements that he has had for five decades of his experience in this industry, he remains as humble as he has ever been. So that is one of the most inspiring things you will know if you meet him, and I have interacted with him for a very long period of time, and that's why I say it. So, thank you and welcome to the show, Dr. Mitta. Welcome to Chai & Chips.

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (01:54) Thank you.

Prakash Mallya: (01:55) I could not think of a better person to start our Chai & Chips journey with. So, thank you for doing it for us and thank you for being here.

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (02:03) Thank you, Prakash.

Prakash Mallya: (02:04) So, let me wind the clock back to where it all started, right? We're talking about 1970s or so. And this is the start of the technology journey for India. You built Wipro during the foundational era of R&D. Maybe we could start with, what was the business environment like at that point in time? What are the challenges? What are the opportunities you saw?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (02:31) So let me start in the 1970s. See, the Indian computer industry has really started in 1971 when ECIL was established by Atomic Energy Commission. The idea was to design, develop, manufacture computers required for projects of national importance. More like real-time computers and all those things. So, in 1973, I joined them after completing my PhD in US and came back. So in a way, I can say that the Indian computer industry and my professional journey are fellow travelers.

(03:17) And at that time, the Indian economic scene was different than what we see today because the initial governments of India were following the socialistic pattern of economic development. So there was a domination of public sector with a very small role for private sector. So everything you have to do industrially has to be approved by government. You need a license to start, you need a license to scale, you need a license to locate, you need a license to get foreign exchange, which was meager, and everything was determined by the government.

(04:03) So at that point in time, the government was looking at the computer scene. So in India, the requirement of computers at that time was... the industry was nascent, and the computer requirements of data processing was met by IBM and ICL from US and UK with their obsolete machines and charging very heavily. And no technology inside the country. In 1977, the government mandated IBM to dilute their ownership of the Indian entity, which they refused and left. So thus, there was a big vacuum in the computer industry.

(04:52) So then what happened was the technology scene. As you know, in 1971 IBM PC came into picture. It created a movement which IBM did not foresee. So at that time, all the computers, whether it's mainframe or minicomputers, were proprietary in nature. So the development of all the subsystems—CPU, memory, controllers, peripherals, operating system, applications—were done by one company and offered. So they are proprietary. It also means you cannot move from one computer to another computer because there is no compatibility of them. So that's how the companies grew and made... IBM became bigger and bigger to $70 billion. Second company which was Digital was $7 billion and all others were small relatively.

(05:50) So when IBM PC came, the interesting feature is that they bought processor from Intel, operating system from Microsoft, peripherals from Shugart. So like that, they bought many subsystems from different vendors, integrated them and sold as IBM PC. So this is called horizontal systems. So IBM, in a way, has sown the seeds for movement from vertical computer proprietary computer systems to horizontal systems, kind of a situation.

(06:28) So the advantage of horizontal system is they are inexpensive, first, because we are getting best of bread subsystems from different vendors. You don't need very heavy capital to design all the systems. And from a customer point of view, they are not locked down to one particular customer or one vendor or one particular computer and all those things. So it gives flexibility for them. So this has created new set of computer companies which are relatively small all over the world. So this was the scene.

(07:06) So now enter Azim Premji. Azim Premji was studying in Stanford, and he has to return without finishing his degree because his father died. And he was asked to take over his business, which was Western India Vegetable Products Limited, making Vanaspati. But as a young man and a person with vision and mission, wanted to get into new technologies. So he was looking for a person who can spearhead this initiative for his company. So he found Ashok Narasimhan from Telco. So Ashok Narasimhan is a young, smart person who was working as a financial controller in Telco, IIM Calcutta MBA. So he met him in some occasion and told him, why don't you join Wipro? Name was changed to Wipro at that time.

(08:11) So he said, "Why should I join? I'm already doing very well in a large company, Telco was the number one company. So why should I join?" "No, no, no, we are thinking of getting into new technologies." So Ashok asked a question, "Are you getting into computers?" Because as a financial controller, he was using an IBM machine and he was familiar with what computers are and what it can do for the organizations. So Premji being smart, he told, "Yeah, we'll start if you join." So the deal is made.

(08:50) So Ashok joined Wipro and trying to set up things for getting into the new technology business. So that's the time Ashok was looking for somebody in technology area to spearhead this initiative of computer business or computer industry. So through his contacts, he found out about me in when I was working in ECIL Hyderabad. And his friend asked me, "Why don't you apply for Wipro?" Okay. I said, "Why should I apply? So I'm already doing very well. I'm in public sector. I'm doing very well. So I don't have any interest to do it." So he told, "Whether you join or not is not my problem, but you fill up this application, give it to me." So I filled up the application given and I was called for an interview by Ashok Narasimhan in Bangalore.

(09:55) So the first thing which struck me was, here is a young man of about 30 years old and general manager already and a smart guy and so it gave me enough reason to talk to him. So the discussion was, how do you start a computer company? What do you do? This one, that one and all those things. So I never had an intention of joining Wipro, I said, okay, thank you very much. And as I was going, he asked me, "When are you going back to Hyderabad?" I said, "Today evening." "So why don't you join us for lunch?" So we had a lunch with him. So then he asked the same questions again. So now I had to be... since there's no free lunch, so we have to answer those questions. And I told, this is what we do, one, two, three, four kind of situation.

(10:51) So then over, I thought it's all over. Then I was called for an interview in Bombay, Bhaktavar, where Wipro was located. So I was not interested, but anyway, I thought I will go and see what is there to... what are they going to offer me. So then I was surprised to see so many people. So one of them is Premji, one of them is Brigadier Malhotra, who was head of LRDE and retired. LRDE was supposed to be the largest employer of electronic engineers at that time in Bangalore.

(11:34) So there was a interview, I was not interested in the job, so things went off. And after a couple of other interviews, I was made an offer by Ashok Narasimhan to join Wipro. He said, "Hold on. First tell me, what is the position?" He said, "R&D manager." I told, "You must be joking. So I'm not a computer person. I did my PhD in control systems. I've not done any R&D. So I was more of a systems engineer or applications engineer which is putting systems for the ECIL together." I may not be the person. But he said, "No, no, we have done our research. So you're the right person."

(12:23) So then I told that, okay, is it microprocessor-based computer systems? He said, "Yes." Then I told him that I have three conditions if you have to join. So first question is location. It should be in Hyderabad or not south of Hyderabad. And why was that? Because I visited these places, I never found to be at home in any of those big cities. That included Bangalore? No, Bangalore, I said south of Hyderabad. It could be Bangalore, Chennai, Trivandrum, could be any place. Okay. So he said location we are not decided, we'll keep this in mind. The second question is, I need to have freedom to choose my team. He said, okay. Three is, who is going to be the CEO of this new company? So we're not decided. Unless you are there, I won't come. He smiled and said, okay. So the offer was made and I said, let me think about for 15 days and come back.

(13:42) So meanwhile, what was happening in ECIL, I was very happy doing projects for defense, space, message switching systems for Air Force, satellite tracking systems for Department of Space, all those such things. But I was following microprocessor development from my PhD days. Intel introduced first 4004, 8008, 8088, 8080, PC and all those things. So Intel announced a 16-bit microprocessor, 8086. So then I studied them and found to be more powerful than the so-called minicomputers which Wipro was developing using that generation technology. So I thought that's the right one to do. So I submitted a paper to ECIL management saying that we should use microprocessor technology for our future vision.

(14:41) So every one of them told that, "No, no, no, no, we are a minicomputer company. Microprocessors are toys." So I thought this is time for me to leave. And meanwhile, I also had some experience of using 8080 processor in some of the defense applications in ECIL itself. So I was hands on.

Prakash Mallya: (15:03) Can I ask you a question on that? What made you think the microprocessors that you were testing and talking about would be more important, a shift than pursuing minicomputers?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (15:15) No, no, no, it made a huge difference. See this is the cornerstone of horizontal systems, from a vertical integrated. True. And the small chip with so many thousands of transistors giving the power of a CPU where we used to make huge rack of electronics. Okay. So then memory, then the control and all. So it's not just microprocessor alone, it's microprocessor technology. So the ability to put in so many transistors in a small chip to do different functions, if you goes from CPU to controllers to other things. See, what is a controller? Controller is nothing but a microprocessor, a specific microprocessor for controlling a device. So this technology, I could foresee number one growing. Number two, it is giving an opportunity for new set of companies, especially in India when there is no installed base of computers and there is no investment to protect... It's a net new technology. And which year are you talking about here? I'm talking about 1973... no sorry... 1980. 1980. Okay. '73 I joined, '80 is this one.

(16:36) So the reason I thought I should join Wipro, I mean, Wipro is one number because of microprocessor technology. Second, they're starting with R&D rather than marketing or factory or other things. Okay. And the third thing is, I told Ashok, "Ashok, I'm thinking of doing something on my own later, two, three years later. So I don't want to join you." He told, "Sridhar, look, Wipro, you are starting from scratch. We are going to do things. So after two, three years, it may succeed, it may fail. If it succeeds, you know how to do things. If it fails, you know how not to do things." That's a good logic. Okay. So, so it's a good amount of discussions and logic to join Wipro.

Prakash Mallya: (17:33) And when you joined them, right, you mentioned three years or so you wanted to start something on your own, but it was still risky to join Wipro at that point in time. What made you shift from ECIL to them?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (17:49) Yeah, it was risky, but the question here is, there is a pull and a push. Push came because ECIL did not look into microprocessor technology. Pull, because of Wipro using microprocessor technology. Okay, that's the thing. And secondly, Wipro was looking at data processing segment. Whereas ECIL was looking at real-time segment.

Prakash Mallya: (18:18) So Dr. Mitta, for audience sake, in simple terms, how do you describe the segments?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (18:26) So I was telling about Bhabha Atomic Research Center, BARC. It was an Atomic Energy Commission because of which the advanced countries put restrictions on what they can import. So, in fact, even simple things like oscilloscopes were not allowed for them to be imported, with the result that BARC has started investing in developing these such things, both products and tools which are required for the atomic energy. Obviously, computers were required. So first they developed analog computers, then they developed digital computers using second-generation technology, which is transistors. It's a 12-bit. So you may ask why 12-bit? 12-bit is because at that time the sensors were having an accuracy of plus minus 1%. So if you convert into bits, it becomes 12 bits. So even if you have more, it is not going to help. So because the signals are coming from real-time, in real-time from other devices. So it was a 12-bit was done.

(19:35) So having developed it, to productionize and to do for other projects which is outside BARC, so they wanted a separate entity, legal entity. So they created ECIL, Electronics Corporation of India Limited, as a public sector under Department of Atomic Energy in Hyderabad. So that's how it has come. So initial customers were obviously BARC, Department of Space, and such customers and such projects. Whereas data processing is payroll, inventory control, and all this which is required by... The usual business. which is required by all the businesses. Businesses require.

Prakash Mallya: (20:23) So, segue I wanted to make is you're talking about microprocessors and the subsystems vertical to horizontal transition that was happening. You had to make a series of bets on which microprocessors to choose, which subsystems to choose. What principles did you employ to arrive at those decisions?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (20:47) Actually, I would say it's a common sense, but many people didn't do it. So first, me, Ashok Narasimhan, Premji sat together and said, "What are we going to do? What is this company going to do?" Build computers, microprocessor technology, fine. But what segment? Is it real-time? Is it academic and research? Or is it data processing? So the answer is quite obvious, data processing, because that is the biggest market, nascent market, and unmet needs are there. In India. We are talking only India. Correct.

(21:23) The second thing is, what processor you are going to use? So it could be 8-bit, it could be 16-bit, because 16-bit has just been announced as you know. So many people advised us saying that because you are a new computer company, you start with 8-bits, get some experience, then go to 16-bit. But I did not believe that because in technology, being ahead of time is always an advantage because we can kind of a leapfrog. It's an advantage rather than a disadvantage. So we said 16-bit.

(22:08) So the next question is, do you want to use a standard microprocessor or buy bit slice? In bit slice, you buy 4-bit ALUs, arithmetic logic units, stack them up into 8-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit, whatever you want, and you have to create an architecture, instruction set, which is quite involved and difficult. So many people tried that and failed. And also in India, there are not many people who can do this one. At least in Wipro, we didn't have. So we said we'll go for a standard microprocessor.

(22:46) Then the question is whether it's Intel or Motorola. So before choosing the microprocessor, so we went me and Ashok Narasimhan went all around US, went to these companies, Intel, Motorola, Digital Research, IBM, HP, no Digital, all these companies to see what is happening. And we found that Intel gave the best option because they said at that time, "We have 8080, we have 8086, we are going to have a 32-bit machine which is compatible to the 16-bit machine. So the same software will run on the new processor also, and then we'll go further."

(23:35) Second, they said, "We have a development system. We have development tools. So if you're a computer company, you need development systems, development tools and all those things to design it." So they had a thing. Also, they had boards and subsystems which initially you can buy and start the development and then slowly change them one by one. So that flexibility was there. So all these things pointed to going with Intel, even though microprocessors from Motorola was supposed to be technologically better. So Intel advantage is compatibility, disadvantage is they have to be compatible to the previous generation. So it was a trade-off.

Prakash Mallya: (24:21) So for a company starting off, it made more sense to pursue Intel.

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (24:27) So having chosen the Intel processor, next question is in terms of whether you need a standard bus. Bus is a mechanism in which different subsystems are stacked in a modular way so that you can remove one subsystem and put another subsystem without changing the other ones. It's a huge advantage. In fact, in ECIL, I suffered from not having a standard bus because every time you do something... So one is to design a bus, other is to look for a standard bus. There were no standards at that time, but Intel has come up with a Multibus, which is a internal standard by Intel, but they published all the definitions so that people can use it. So we chose Intel Multibus, which later became a IEEE standard.

(25:21) So after that, the issue is what kind of peripherals you want to use. So that's the time when Al Shugart defined and introduced a new set of computers called Winchester disk drives. They're hermetically sealed, requiring very... I mean, very environmental conditions. Whereas normal disk drives at that time used to be like a washing machine having 1 MB of capacity, removable disk drives. So you need dust-free, temperature, everything has to be controlled.

Prakash Mallya: (26:08) And we've come such a long way on storage.

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (26:10) Whereas this one is very small, relatively small, 14.5 MB. And the environmental conditions are not severe. So we chose that. So then what happened was the all the subsystems hardware was straightforward and we did that. Actually, when you look back, there were several companies which came in India at that time. One company was started by Stanford graduates, very smart, very good guys. They didn't follow this simple logic. So they defined their own processor, they defined their own bus. They needed a lot of money which they didn't have. And they were behind kind of situation. And not only it helped us to put in a system very fast within a year, it helped us next 10 years as Intel was going with the new processors. So we are able to quickly adapt.

Prakash Mallya: (27:12) And which company are you talking about?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (27:14) PSI.

Prakash Mallya: (27:15) PSI.

Prakash Mallya: (27:17) And during that time, I'm sure you interacted with the industry visionaries on the Valley side. Can you recall any of the anecdotes which could be interesting for our audience?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (27:31) Yeah, it's interesting because we went and visited so many companies, US, UK, and all those things. So they were still in proprietary systems. They were so confident, they know everything and they are the right one. Just give one example.

(27:54) So Siemens was number one, and then Nixdorf was number two. So me and Ashok Sudha went and visited their company in Germany. Everything was fantastic, so big, kind of a situation. And they looked at... they showed us where they design computers, where they design PCBs, where they design housing, all those things. So we have these tools worth few million dollars. This is a thing, this is the connector, this is the... everything was so perfect. So we had a final meeting. And I asked the question saying that, what's your processor? 16-bit processor. How many MIPS it is? So many MIPS. And MIPS is? Million instructions per second.

(28:46) So then I was shocked. Their MIPS is less than 8086 MIPS. That means 8086 processor is better than that one. Okay. Then I said, what bus you use? "No, no, our own bus." Okay, fine. And each PCB was made with a shield, golden contacts and all those things. It's a piece of art. And PCB is printed circuit board. So all those things. Then I asked a question, what is your operating system? Our proprietary operating system.

(29:34) Then why should somebody buy your computer if I have the higher performance with a lower cost based on microprocessor? "No, no, no, no, Dr. Mitta, we... this is a secret." I said, what is the secret? "We have COMET." I said, what is this COMET? "This is a set of software programs which we have written, covers all possible things which a business needs - accounts payable, accounts receivable, this one, all those things. And we spent so many man-years, so much of money building it, so much of time, nobody can replicate this. So that's our secret."

(30:17) Then I asked him a question. So, what language you developed? He said, "BASIC." So I was... I mean, laughing to myself. And then I asked him, what database you are using? "No, no, our proprietary database." So the net-net is everything is proprietary, it's very expensive, fantastic company, fantastic computer, but price is 10 times more. Very high. So after coming out, I told this company will not survive more than four years. A startup company from India going to Germany and looking at the obvious, and they, in that business, they could not see it. See it. So it went bankrupt. Then it got acquired by... Acquired by Siemens.

(31:16) So, that's the kind of thing we used to... similarly another company in UK, similar situation. So there are many people who don't see successful companies don't see what is coming next. Around the corner. The corner next. Same story repeats again and again and again.

Prakash Mallya: (31:37) It is known to everyone, but it's so hard to beat what they call entropy. So you talked about hardware elements, can you elaborate more on how you chose the software elements?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (31:51) See the choice of hardware was very straightforward. Okay. What is the processor, bus, and all those things. When it came to the operating system, there are two options. One is you develop everything from scratch, it takes three, four years and it's very complex. Second option is to buy an operating system from a vendor. But at that time, there were only two operating systems available. So one was from Microsoft, MS-DOS or PC-DOS. The second was CPM from Digital Research. So these were developed for 8-bit personal computer machines. But they are not suitable or does not use all the facilities of 16-bit 8086. So there's no things. Secondly, the usage in India is different, data processing versus personal computer.

(32:46) So we were looking for licensing any operating system if it exists. And we started looking and went around the United States. We were lucky to find a company called Sentinel Computers. It was a startup company. The background is Cincinnati, they have Cincinnati Milacron, which is the world's largest numerical control company. So they were using computers, Motorola computers for their own these things. So one day they decided we should get into commercial data processing. So they formed a separate business unit, hired people and started making and selling those machines. Obviously, they don't know how to sell commercial machines being a NC company. So the board decided to close it. So the people who are working didn't have any other option to get out and they started this company called Sentinel Computers.

(33:54) At that time, there were no VCs and all those things, especially in Ohio. So then they wanted to build a computer which are application-specific. So they quickly zeroed on Intel, where they bought all the hardware: CPU, memory, disk controller, communication controller, all those things, including power supply and rack. So put together a computer in no time. So it so happened that there was a company called Tominy, few meters away from Sentinel. And that company was started by a guy by name Tominy. Tominy used to work for Cincom. Cincom is Cincinnati Computers. They produced one of the world's top two databases. One was IBM, other is Cincom Total. And it was very well received by the industry.

(34:54) So the Tominy guy told, "We are doing for mainframes, why don't you do for smaller computers like IBM Series/1?" The board vetoed the proposal saying that, "We are a mainframe company, why should we worry about these small companies, I mean small computers?" So he left and started this company for operating system combined with database, running on a smaller mini-type computers, IBM Series/1 type. So it suited them. So Sentinel people met Tominy and negotiated and they licensed it. The problem is the original is written for Series/1, this is for Intel 8086. So they have to re- ... kind of a... what you call, transfer that to the Intel processor. So they bought an Intel development system and all those things using PL/1 language. So they quickly made an operating system which is.

Prakash Mallya: (36:02) So they had to recompile it?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (36:03) Recompile, I mean rewrite, recompile. Kind of situation. It is called porting. So they ported from IBM Series/1 to Intel 8086 processor. And the greatest thing is, number one, it is multi-user, multi-tasking, and database built-in, and a lot of tools to develop software on-line for the applications. So they're all comes in a small package which needs least memory, kind of a situation. So they started using that one. And now they found another vendor who will develop application, application such as accounts payable, receivable and all those things, it will run on this. So Sentinel was targeting small enterprises with this combination.

(36:58) So we said we are interested in licensing the operating system. So will you give it to us? He said, "No, why should I give it to you? You guys will copy and run away." I said, if I'm copying and run away, why will I come to you? In fact, the other way, if you license it to us, we will protect you if anybody copies in India. So we are an ethical company. So we want to use you, use your operating system and then build on that an operating system which we will use for commercial data processing.

(37:34) So we said this is the opportunity for you. So after a lot of discussion, they agreed. And to give the source code and the technology, if any. So then we agreed, we signed the contract. So we have to pay money for them in foreign exchange. As I told you, the foreign exchange is scarce in India. And we went to the government and said we want to pay this company this much of money, please allow us. So we are paying actually, but only foreign exchange is the permission from the government. They said, "Why are you coming and asking? Nobody has asked this before. Everybody is copying, you copy it." I said, "No. If you copy, the industry will not come up. So the software industry builds on not copying." So if you want to build an industry, you should pay for it.

(38:35) The second point was that there is nothing defined in the import-export trade policy of India, what is software. So how can you pay for something that is not defined? So there was some good people in the department, they came up with a solution, called calling it as a "design and drawings." So we are allowed to import "design and drawings of an operating system" for so many thousand dollars. It is the first time in India government giving permission to import software legally by paying money. Incredible story.

(39:26) So then when we bought this one, we had a problem. So the software will come in... at that time 8-inch diskettes, some 100 disks. But when you brought those things, we declared at the customs. The customs officer looked at it, "What? What is this? I don't know." And so much of value. "No, no, no, no, I will confiscate it." So he confiscated and took a big nail and put them through it. My God. Tied it just like in government office they do it, this, "Now you go and appeal. I don't want to take any decision." But fortunately, Ashok... sorry, Lee Cole, who is the Vice President of International for Sentinel was coming, he brought another set of disks with him so that we can start working on that. And meanwhile, to justify that we paid properly, we have to make a paper tape... sorry, a hard copy of the operating system because it's design and drawings, it cannot be in diskettes which they don't know what it is. So I then put a bundle it, so this is what we imported.

(40:46) So that's the level of technology government and all those things which has to be done and when you are doing for first time, you go through all these things.

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (40:55) So that's how we got the operating system. So the first computer was called Wipro Series 86. And when did you launch it? We launched it in 1981, February, in the Computer Society of India Annual Convention. The CSI Annual Convention originally started as a scientific academic get-together. And slowly, it has reached a stage where companies which are coming announce their products or these things in that conference. So in 1980, I joined in May. So by December, we have one prototype using bought-out subsystems from Intel and operating system from them. Only one system, only one terminal, and we are... have to take a decision to whether announce it in February '81 or wait until next year. As in which time you lose close to a year. More than a year.

(42:06) So if you have to announce a product, we have to be ready in next two months. We don't have drawings, we don't have spares, we don't have anything. And what do we do? So we decided to announce anyway. So we quickly put together the system. In fact, we didn't have a second terminal. And how can you announce a computer multi-terminal with one terminal? So we had to go around the country and find out one company in Chennai had a similar terminals. So we begged them, borrowed those two terminals for the announcement in Delhi. And we have to change the firmware of that terminals. We didn't have a prom programmer. So all kinds of things. Challenges. Finally, when we had the prototype, the day before the conference, the machine didn't work. So we didn't have diagrams, power supply didn't work. We didn't have the diagrams. So our hardware manager was a power supply expert. So he did some things and said, "Let me go to temple and come." The last resort. He went to Malai Mandir in Delhi, prayed and came, and it started working. And next day, we took it and put it there. And the computer was so small compared to rooms worth of... full of these things. It was a desktop, one like a drawers. The old computer was in the drawer. So if you come and see, it looks like a table, office table.

(44:03) So when we demonstrated this in the thing, people said, "Where is your computer?" "It's there." "No, I don't see computer, I see only table." "No, no, no, you guys are cheating." So next day, what we did is open the computer, put backside to the front so that people can... something really there is something. And we are able to run programs. And we challenged the people, "You come with your programs, we'll run it." And Ashok Narasimhan made the announcement, formal announcement in CSI. That was a breath of fresh air. And it was so nice, the computer was so good and presentation was so good, that Wipro from an unknown entity became a known entity in one day because of this thing.

Prakash Mallya: (44:52) And how many years of work did it take you to get to that point?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (44:55) It's one... less than a year. Okay. I told you, I joined in May. I went to US for the first time in August. We came back, then two people went to Sentinel to get all the technology transfer, all those things.

Prakash Mallya: (45:10) So very quick turnaround to create and stand up a new system.

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (45:16) That's because of the decisions we made in the beginning.

Prakash Mallya: (45:19) Yeah. The choices you made. On different subsystems components. Yeah. Wonderful, fascinating story.

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (45:27) So that's the beginning of microprocessor-based minicomputer system, kind of a situation. I forgot to tell you one more thing, why location wise. See the government of India specifies where you should set up your company. And every year, they announce industrially backward areas where you are allowed to set up the company, not anywhere you like if you have to get a license. So at that year, at that time, they specified three places. One is Aurangabad in Maharashtra, in fact, which is close to Wipro's Vanaspati factory. Second was Patancheru near Hyderabad, where there's nothing but green fields. Third one was Mysore. Mysore is a developed, decent city.

(46:24) So I said, north of Hyderabad is not allowed. Hyderabad, Patancheru is not good. Obviously, choice is Mysore. So Wipro came to Mysore first as per the government conditions. Having come to Mysore for factory, we went... we came to Bangalore for R&D and marketing and all those things. Right. So many people think that Wipro came to Bangalore because of good weather, Indian Institute of Science, all kinds of public sector, talent and all these things. No. We came because of government in Mysore for factory and because of which we came to Bangalore.

Prakash Mallya: (47:09) That's a good clarification for our audience on how Bangalore came to become the Silicon Valley of India, the way it is today. Yeah, that was the start of it.

(47:21) So, you talked about the entire journey of starting out as a hardware business and I've had the good fortune of selling some of the systems built by you and your team when I started my career in Wipro, and I must say it was a very proud moment on hardware built in India at that point in time which we used to sell. Wipro Supergenius machines was one of the systems I remember, which came later.

(47:50) So, fast forward a few years. So the first 20 years or so, the focus was to build design capabilities within Wipro R&D. And the next years onwards, it would be more oriented towards building global scale capabilities and making Wipro the name what it is today. So how did you go about it? What were your learnings through that journey?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (48:20) So when government was thinking of liberalizing the entry of foreign companies. See so far, the Indian market was a closed market. So the competition was between Indian companies. So as long as you are better than another Indian company, you're all right. Correct. So we never faced any global competition. So 1990, government said, we are going to allow foreign companies to come in with certain conditions like 60% owned by foreign company, 40% owned by this one. So it sent shockwaves to Indian companies because, number one, they are large companies, global companies. They have technology, they have money, they have marketing, they have all the abilities. Only thing they may lack is how do you market in India and support in India, kind of a situation. So that is the general thing.

(49:20) So as a question, as a head of R&D, what is the impact of this company, this decision if government takes, as and when it takes, on R&D? So it dawned on us. So if door is open for you to... for somebody to come inside, it's also open for you to get out. But on a global scale, we are a tiny company. So we started looking in why the companies will be interested in Wipro. What is that unique thing which we can offer?

(50:02) So that's when the thing hit us because Unix was becoming the main-line operating system moving from engineering workstations to commercial systems. There was a lot of demand for Unix talent. And we were lucky to have AT&T Unix source and then having implemented on 386 and many other machines, we had a talent which is well-versed with Unix. So we started offering Unix-based services to global companies which there was a global shortage of Unix talent.

(50:41) But we asked ourselves, why should that US company give it to us? Because we didn't want to send people from here to US and do the work like the body shopping. But we want to do work from India. So there are three impediments. First thing is how do they trust Indian company? The second one is what is your infrastructure? Third one is what is the quality and timeliness you are going to give. So these are the three questions anybody will ask. So we started thinking on that.

(51:25) So first in terms of trusting, so we have to project our credentials already which has come in terms of we are a trustworthy company. Second is we have to have quality standards which said that not only meets quality, but I am going to give in time. So we looked around and said, are there any international quality standards which we can follow, which the customer looks at it and we look at it, agree on it. There were no standards, software standards at that time. So then we thought, why don't we use ISO 9000, which is actually for factory. In fact, Wipro factory got ISO 9000 accreditation. It was meant for factory. So we took that factory certification... not certification, factory standards and how to implement for software.

(52:30) Probably we are the first company in the world to use ISO 9000 for software. So when the potential customers come here and we show that we have this quality system, we say what we do, we do what we say. These are all the tools we have, these are all the information about how we are developing and we can share this with you online so that you don't have to get a shock saying that I'm not doing it, I'm not quality and all those things. It was an easy sell because none of the companies they didn't have any standards. I mean, they may have internal things, but they don't have international international standards.

(53:13) And then Carnegie Mellon University came up with CMM level 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. So ISO 9000 software is equivalent to level three of CMM. So we got ourselves upgraded for level four and we had training, all these people from US will come for accreditation. And we were... kind of a, first time we got the approval for level five in India. At that time, there were only three companies in the world which got it. One is IBM, Motorola, and some other company. And they got for specific project or specific division. Whereas in our case, we got level five for the whole company. So that was another unique thing.

(54:08) So in terms of infrastructure, we had a problem to guarantee the thing. So the communication was a problem, internet. It was controlled by Department of Telecommunications. So at that time, we used to have a head of Department of Electronics, Mr. Vittal, who saw this problem and gave a very fantastic solution. He said, okay, DoT doesn't want to lose control because government control is required for communication. He started another government agency called STPI where he kept an antenna to receive directly satellite communication, still owned by government. And from that satellite, you can get connections. So he circumvented all the things which was required.

(55:02) So then in terms of power and all those things, we had a generators in the basement, we have a this one storing of diesel required for next 30 days. All kinds of things we did it. So most important thing was the communication. So when we did all these things, our idea is to set up a center in India which mimics the center of the customer. Okay. So same machines, same tools, same intercom system, everything. So we called it India Development Center, which later was called ODC and now we are calling them as GCCs. So the first time we did before anybody else did that. For India development centers.

(55:53) So when these things were happening, there is another requirement which has come from Indian market. So when defense needed computers, they needed rugged computers. Rugged computers means they have to withstand high temperatures, low temperatures, shock, vibration, and electromagnetic radiations and all those things which takes a lot of time. And then they have to develop application software. So what we suggested is we'll give a commercial version of the machine where you can develop the software in parallel, we'll do the computer's ruggedization. So we did that.

(56:37) So that was used for all the defense missile projects. So Dr. Kalam was in charge of DLRL. So he came up with this initiative called Integrated Guided Missile Systems. So several missiles, including Akash which came into recently. Uh, we given test systems, rugged test systems for that. Okay, okay. Similarly, NAL was working on computational fluid dynamics. So they needed huge computing resource which was difficult to get it. So there was a machine, Cray, in Delhi where they can't go and use it. Even if they get a time, they get for 10 minutes, 15 minutes like that. And NAL, which is the spearheading this work, they had very obsolete CDC machine which takes hours and hours to do one iteration.

(57:42) So one day, the scientist from NAL walked into my room and said that I need a parallel computer. I said we don't do parallel computers. We do commercial computers. "No, no, no, you take your CPU, put second CPU, third CPU, fourth CPU." "We don't have software." "No, no, I will write the software." So, this guy what he had done is, he has taken the computational fluid dynamics problem and cut it into four pieces. Each piece running on one, one CPU simultaneously and giving me the answer. It is domain decomposition technique which they use. So I was a little kind of skeptical whether it will work and what he says... Because this guy, big beard and all those things, he murmurs, we don't even understand what he says. A typical scientist. But I could establish a common wavelength.

(58:56) So I told his name is Dr. Sinha. "Sinha, we will do one thing. I will not sell the computer. I will put up a computer in my lab. You come and do all the things and prove it works, then I will sell you." So he liked it. So he came, did that one. So one processor performance X, four processor 4X. Okay. Fantastic. So true scalability for that particular set of problems. And that performance, 4X, is better than his mainframe. He said that if I buy this machine, I have a machine for 24x7 for myself. Why should I go and beg time on these things? Yeah. So that's how we sold first machine, it was called Flow Solver to NAL.

(59:45) So he was so happy and so greedy. I want 16 processors. So 16 processors. More than 16, it don't work. Then we had... this was first 8086. Then we have put 386, 16 processors, Mark II. Then we had 860, put that one. So he was constantly getting highest performance at lowest cost and beating even the performance of Cray in his own lab. So like that, we did parallel computers for several people. So all these projects of national importance which people don't get it from outside India or even not allowed to get it from India, or it takes time to develop, we are able to do it very silently without kind of a situation, because of which Wipro R&D received Award of Excellence for Electronics for five continuous years.

(1:00:50) So this was the contribution to the Indian side. Then on the other side, we told you ability to do software development from India for US companies, things. So when initially it worked out, the India development concept, we found that it's a big opportunity. Because we were... customer is happy because his cost is one-third. Wipro is happy because it's making 40% net profit. Government was happy, we are getting foreign exchange. Okay. Employees were happy, they are working on the latest and current technology.

(1:01:31) So we saw, we thought it's a good opportunity. So we should form a separate business unit. R&D, which was a cost center in Wipro, became a profit center and called Global R&D. While doing this work, two other interesting things happened. One was when I am designing hardware for US companies, so initially it is integrated circuits, VLSI, LSIs. So then we have gate arrays. Then we need to make specific VLSI... For our audience, if you can explain VLSI in simple terms. Very large integrated circuits. Okay. So which has a lot of transistors and a lot of functionality in a single chip.

(1:02:23) Then we reached a stage where we have to do more performance in the chips. We have FPGAs, Field Programmable Gate Arrays. It is like a computer, pre-fabricated and give the performance by programming the layer. So hardware one layer is fixed, one layer is programmable. So then it became obvious saying that hardware designer has to be VLSI designers if they have to continue to work with companies, even though there was no pressure on Indian side. But to get a VLSI experience, it is a tough choice. You need an engineering workstation which costs a crore of rupees. We need a VLSI tool which costs one crore of rupees. Okay. And then we need people to be trained, it costs one crore.

(1:03:23) So the total capital budget of Wipro during that year was 4 crores, and I wanted 3 crores only for this project. And which year was that? This is about 1990, early 90s. So I didn't even go and ask for it because I know the answer. So we have to come with a smart way to do it. So then I found a company which is spun out of... not spun out of, people working in VLSI Technology, US, came out to India to develop chips. They have the idea, they have the experience, but they don't have money. They don't have computer, they don't have workstation, they don't have anything.

(1:04:03) So I went to them and told that, "Look, I will get you Sun workstation to do this. If you get the VLSI tools, legal version, on my machine, you can use one shift, I can use another shift." So they... fantastic. So then I went to our finance CFO, told him I need a one crore computer, Sun computer. How do you make it happen? And I explained to him why I want it. He told that, "No problem. See, we are distributors for Sun Microsystems. If I get one thing, it adds to the... I mean the overall sales of Wipro. And we get a discount, obviously." So he collected all the money, unused money and allowed me to buy a Sun workstation. So I have a workstation, I have a VLSI tools. Now I need training.

(1:05:07) We found another manager in VLSI Technology, US, they used to design customer-specific chips, ASICs. Okay. Application-specific integrated circuit. So he was actually defining, I mean designing the subsystems for Apple computers. And he needs system designers, not chip designers. See, these two are two different things. One is the system knowledge, other is a chip knowledge. So very few people were available at that time who had both these things. So I told this gentleman saying that I have system designers who design high... high performance, high speed systems. 386, Pentium and all things. Whereas we don't know how to design chips, tools. So we'll send two of us, two of our engineers. You train them for three months or six months and use them for six months. Don't have to pay anything. I don't pay anything, you don't pay me anything because getting foreign exchange was a problem.

(1:06:18) So when these two guys went there in month or month and a half, they learned the tool. They started designing the chips which were first-time success. Okay. So they liked it so much, saying that, okay, now that we are designing, you come back, you go to another team. So I built a team of VLSI engineers over time. And today, Wipro has, or by the time I left, Wipro has 5,000 chip designers, which is the largest ensemble of chip designers in the world, other than Intel, AMD and all those things. Fantastic. So that's one thing we built.

(1:06:59) The other thing I would like to state is a situation which has come in communication industry, telecom, datacom industry. So once I went to a customer, Cisco, and said that, how are we doing? He said, "You are fine, but I don't... I'm not happy with you." I said, why are you not happy? "Because you want to choose the work you want to do. You want to do only development, but not testing." I said, it's not true. We'll do both for you. We are an important customer for us. I came back and asked the R&D manager, why you are not doing testing for Cisco? "No sir, they want the same people who develop the product, also want to test it. This is different department, that is different department. In between, there is a lot of time wasted. So I can't keep my resources idle. And also they are very, very scarce resource globally." So I could see the reason, but also I looked at the body language and said, we are not interested in testing.

(1:08:06) So then I went to Nortel and asked them, so what do you do for testing? "Yeah, it's something which you don't want to do, because we develop a product, we do the testing, that's fine. But I have to test my products with my competition product, which I don't like. So it's a specific need of a communication industry of interoperability testing. Right. So here is something which is big, which customers don't want to do it, and we can do it. It's a huge opportunity. It's a significant opportunity. Correct. So I talked to many communication CTOs. And they all told the same thing.

(1:08:49) So then I wanted to have a separate business unit called Interop Unit and asked for $2 million budget. So in our annual budget meeting, so Premji asked me, okay, you want $2 million. Okay, how much return you will give me? "Sir, I don't know." When are you going to give it? "I don't know." So then how can I give money? So typical VC type questions. Then I got an idea. I said that, okay, you don't invest, I will invest. So Premji said, "What do you mean you invest?" "So you have approved the budget of Global R&D. So I will fund them." Okay. From your own existing budget. Your budget. Okay. Existing resource, assets. So he said, okay, do it.

(1:09:39) So then what happened was I got a person who was in factory, called production engineering team head, whose business is to break R&D systems. So he gets a lot of pleasure in making these systems fail. So I got that guy and saying, "You are in charge of this division. I'll give you $1 million budget to you. You can do anything you want, you can use any of the R&D resources, you can go and attend conferences, courses, everything. I will get you first customer. Second year, you have to give me $1 million profit." He said, okay.

(1:10:18) I got first customer, Lucent Microsystems. And we are testing. Because we are developing also, we are testing. So what is the price for this one? So it's 80% of the development cost. Fine. Second year, I said it should be same. Why? No, we are doing same work. Third year I said, you have to pay 20% more. Why? "We are specialists." So we started doing interop testing for all the global top eight datacom and telecom companies. That business today is $1 billion. Wow. Highest margin, lowest attrition. Okay. And easy to get talent. It has come a long way.

(1:11:12) What I find fascinating is as you explained how you went about it, the entrepreneurial way of thinking on fixing the hardware infrastructure need, software need, and training all came together by your new or creative way of thinking.

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (1:11:32) Yeah, it can be called innovation, it can be called entrepreneurship or intrapreneurship. It's basically, I come from a business family. Right. Okay. So I know the concepts of profit, loss, inventory, what to be done when I was 10 years old, 15 years old. But I did not get into business. Didn't want to get into business, family business. But unlike many CTOs who are very much better than me or kind of a situation, I had this commercial thing from beginning. Right from the beginning. Because of which I am able to kind of a see what is going to happen. And a few other things I did in Wipro is customer is right, customer is first, which means R&D is there to serve the customer, not customer should buy what R&D makes.All senior people in Wipro has to go and meet customers. Any customer problem has to be addressed immediately. No permission required.

(1:12:39) So that culture of customer first. Even a new prospect comes, the first visit is to my office, CTO office. Okay. So I had to tell them this is what I am doing, this is what I'm going to do. These are all the things, take him to the lab, show the prototypes, and then next step is to go to factory, they see the things being produced. Whereas at that time, very few companies had this kind of facilities, assets.

Prakash Mallya: (1:13:09) And another observation as I've read about Wipro R&D evolution is your close collaboration with academic institutions, specifically Indian Institute of Science. And that is a theme that one sees even in Silicon Valley. So can you talk through what came about it? Was it by chance or was it deliberate? What made you collaborate with them?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (1:13:33) See, initially when Wipro was started, one of the conditions to get license is to have Indian technology or kind of a scenario. Just about the time I what I joined. So Wipro decided to fund a project to Indian Institute of Science where a committee of professors were formed in C-CEDT, Center for Electronic and Design Technology, to advise Wipro on the architecture. So by the time I joined, it was already there and I didn't have an office or a house, so I used to sit in Indian Institute of Science in one of the professor's cabins. And many people used to think I'm a professor there.

(1:14:27) So we had a lot of discussions. So whatever we decided, I told you on this process, they were also part of that kind of a situation. So in a way, Wipro was started in Institute of Science campus. So we are the first. They used to have a program called CSIC, Center for Scientific and Industrial Collaboration, something like that. So we went through that one. In subsequently, they were developing some parallel processing technologies which we tried to use it. So that's another project. Then we had a professor from Electrical Engineering department who developed a software for grid optimization. So when you keep a new point in a grid, everything changes. So mainframes used to be used abroad. And obviously, we can't do that one. So he developed this software using the minicomputer type. But user interface was bad and it's only professor can use it, nobody can use it, all those things. So you have to take that code and use good user interface, graphic terminals, color terminals and all those things, you do with this, do that, test scenario. So then we commercialized that software, paid royalty to Indian Institute of Science.

(1:15:53) Then at a given time, people were expecting Mac operating systems to become a standard after Unix. Because many people asked after Unix what? So Mac was the supposed to be the answer. So we gave a project to IIT Bombay to develop Mac-like operating system there. Similarly, graphics were coming in terms of usage and all that. So we gave a project to IIT Kanpur to do that project for us. So we did have a reasonable amount, I won't say large amount, but reasonable amount of interactions with the thing. But I was associated with the universities very much. I used to be a visitor to IIT Kanpur to select professors and their promotions for two years. I used to be in selection committee of Indian Institute of Science professors and these things. So we maintained good connections.

Prakash Mallya: (1:16:48) That's something that even companies in deep tech can take away because it can be such a such a good model to collaborate with academic institutions.

(1:17:00) So we talked about the initial days of Wipro and how you evolved it as a Wipro Global R&D. And it's a good time to take a break and do a quick rapid fire which will be more of fun questions that Dr. Mitta may not have answered in the past. Are you ready for it, Dr. Mitta?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (1:17:20) Yes.

Prakash Mallya: (1:17:21) Okay. Okay, Dr. Mitta. A set of quick questions for you. Starting this one. What's one memory from your hometown? I believe you grew up in Chittoor in Andhra Pradesh that still brings a smile to your face?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (1:17:37) The moment you talk about Chittoor, we remember the elementary school, the day I went to school, high school, friends, picnics, all those things. But one thing I remember about specifically about Chittoor is its round roads. See, near Chittoor, we had a lot of hillocks with the green cover. And they were concentric walkable, motorable roads. That's why it's called round roads. The history is that the collector of Chittoor, British, had a problem. His wife was suffering from TB and there was no medicine for TB at that time other than having a fresh air and other things. So he constructed it. So all of us in Chittoor, every evening, I'm sorry, every Sunday evening, our group will go for a walk, either 2 mile, 4 mile, 6 mile depending on that. And just outside the round roads, we had a big tank, tank bund, then green fields, then a temple. So it's a lot of nice memories about Chittoor.

Prakash Mallya: (1:18:51) If you were stuck in a desert island and if you are allowed one gadget to take with you, what will you take and why?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (1:19:02) I'll take a satellite phone. Why? See, when I am in desert, in a desert, in an island, so first thing is communication. So we can't get anything else. The only satellite phone has the ability to communicate. Second is it is also gives the coordinates for somebody to reach where you can ask for help. Good answer.

Prakash Mallya: (1:19:27) You have been in chips, so this is chip-specific question. If chips were to give you one superpower, what would you like?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (1:19:38) No, chips give me the power. No, I want artificial intelligence with humanness. Wow. Good answer. Value, ethics, these things.

Prakash Mallya: (1:19:56) Tell us one quirky or fun fact about Dr. Mitta that not many people know.

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (1:20:04) I love American football. Wow. Do you watch it? I watch it. So when I was in US as a student, I lived in an apartment next to the football ground. A lot of noise. So even if you go to library, a lot of noise. I said, instead of being outside, why don't you be inside? So I went inside. And initially, it looked like a brutal game. In subsequently, I started liking it. So by the time the season is over, I had two televisions in my house to watch two games simultaneously. And even when I came to India, I kept track of which side is winning, what is everything, even though you are not getting running commentaries or this one, but I keep following to the news. So obviously my favorite teams, the college team, Oklahoma State University Cowboys and it's so happens the Dallas Cowboys are also my favorite.

Prakash Mallya: (1:21:12) Very cool. So outside of technology, what's one hobby that takes a lot of your time and something you're passionate about?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (1:21:22) I'm not a games person, spend a lot of time. I spend whenever I get time reading more about technology and update myself. But one thing I do is in the earlier days, I used to play bridge. So now I do Sudoku regularly.

Prakash Mallya: (1:21:43) So last question. A movie is getting made about your life. Who would you cast in that movie to play your role and why?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (1:21:55) I would say Tom Hanks. The reason is I'm an introvert. So he has acted in many films where the character was important, but they know physical exhibition of might and fight.

Prakash Mallya: (1:22:20) Awesome. Great set of answers. I'm sure audience got to hear from Dr. Mitta and learn more about you that most people wouldn't know. So let me get back to where we dropped off. You talked about Wipro R&D's journey. And let me fast forward to now, right? A lot of deep tech is about building a very strong ecosystem. So for example, if you're looking at hardware or semiconductor, it will require chip design, system design, material science, so many other skills to be available. And in India, though we have a lot of engineering skills, deep tech skills are scarce. So based on your experience of leading Wipro R&D team to great heights, what advice would you have, what practical steps could industry, academic institutions, and policy advisors take in order to build a very strong deep tech ecosystem?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (1:23:25) See let me start with an experience I had when I was in United States between year '98, 2000. There was a study conducted by Stanford University. The question is, why is Silicon Valley great? Can you create another Silicon Valley elsewhere in the world? So it is a interdepartmental research for two years. And they presented their findings and in fact was also written as a book. So I could attend that one. They said that Silicon Valley is great because of so many things coming together. And the most important thing is the ecosystem of Silicon Valley, which attracts the best talent from all over the world. It gives them the freedom and it gives the all the other things which are required, especially the risk capital and tolerance to failures. So the keyword is ecosystem.

(1:24:31) And they said that Silicon Valley cannot be recreated elsewhere in the world. In fact, that answers the some of the questions here. Deep tech, why Silicon Valley, why not in Los Angeles? Same United States, same California, same sort of people. So the issue is one of building the ecosystem rather than looking only at people, only at technology, only at infrastructure, government policies, all of them has to come together. So I explained to you what are all the constraints we had at that time when you started it. And in spite of that, several IT companies, including Wipro has come and became successful, became a global company. But today, things are different. For example, Intel wanted to produce 386 chips in India after its peak is over so that they still demand. They said there is no way it can be done in India. They came and then that's when it went to Israel.

(1:26:23) So to say that what is required is very obvious saying that we need all the things of an ecosystem to be built. Fortunately, today most of it is happening in India, not to the extent we would like to have it. So we are going to see soon some of the successes like what happens in Silicon Valley here.

Prakash Mallya: (1:26:51) And another element of deep tech's success in any country would be IP on what you create. And there also, I feel Wipro Global R&D created a lot of IP that got used in some of the initiatives you drove. So any learnings from what your journey people can take away, entrepreneurs can take away on building IP that can really last the existence and growth of the company.

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (1:27:25) See, there are two types of IP. One is work of mind: patents, trademarks and all those things which are protected by law. More of innovation and other things. So great things need IP to protect so that you can make investment and then recoup the things. But 99% of IPs are useless or not monetizable. So that's one aspect.

(1:27:55) The second thing is in semiconductor industry, the IP means reusability. You develop a hardware module or a software thing which is well-defined and they can be reused multiple times in multiple chips. For example, IEEE 1394 is a standard of IEEE, which is for the input-output. So one can take the standard and implement it so that any chip which is made where they need 1394 or a PC or a this one, you can use this without developing from scratch. So that is the semiconductor IPs. These are the two things.

(1:28:39) But coming back to now, so there are different aspects of IP which are to be done. One is a strong production of IP legally, which today we have in India. Second is the implementation. So how do you implement it so that if there is a breach happens, it should be... it should not take tens of years, it should be done. So that means the IP legal system, judicial system, should understand how to adjudicate in IP cases. We need lawyers, we need this one which is takes time to develop. So which is already happening. And the IP these officers which grant this one, they should have officers who knows how to evaluate and grant IP. So again, it's a question of ecosystem of patent ecosystem coming into the country.

Prakash Mallya: (1:29:37) And you believe progress is happening on all those fronts that you talked about?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (1:29:39) Yes, yes, certainly it's happening.

Prakash Mallya: (1:29:43) And a follow-on question would be, looking back at your entrepreneurial journey, especially in the R&D space, what advice would you have for an entrepreneur today who is venturing into the deep tech, semiconductors, AI, robotics, those kinds of areas out of India?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (1:30:04) I have one advice. Typically what happens, technical people who are into deep tech, they worry so much about technology. They look into that and keep developing it. But what is more important than technology is its usage. Okay. And applying technology is, I would say, more important than development of, invention of technology. It is required, but not that one. This is a lesson I got from my professor in Oklahoma State University. I went to US to do my PhD in computers and I did not get financial aid. So another department gave me financial aid, which is systems engineering department, which I said no. This a professor, Indian professor who used to take interest in me. I told, "This is what happened." He said, "Don't be stupid. What is more important is how to apply technology, not to learn technology or develop technology." It is required but not that one.

(1:31:20) So that was etched in my mind, which I see every time. Intel spends billion dollars, makes 386 chip. But to make it a PC, you need IBM, you need Microsoft, you need, say Digital Research, you need Taiwanese companies. So many people are investing so much of money not by Intel, but by others, which is 100 times, 1000 times bigger than that. Am I right? Yeah. So the difference between a successful technology company and a not so successful is besides technology, how do I use this technology? What are the application areas? Either you do yourself or work with partners. Then only is it useful... technology by itself is no use.

Prakash Mallya: (1:32:06) Yeah. That's such a powerful advice and even in my experience, it has held true for several industries which have developed products, but unless there is customers using it, the technology on its own does not make a lot of sense. Yeah, agree. So coming to today, you have been involved, you co-founded NextWealth entrepreneurs. The focus is social impact. Tell us a bit more about it. Why you started it? Where you are today? What's... what do you think about it looking ahead?

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (1:32:43) Yeah, when I completed 60 years of age and personally didn't have much responsibilities, so I thought it's time for me to give back something to the society. Okay. So I was fortunate to work with my co-founder Anand Talwai and S.R. Gopalan who is no more, to arrive at what is the best way to do by our team. So we are technologists, we are in computers, so we know the market, we know all those things. So how do you use this knowledge, computer... sorry, contacts to do social good.

(1:33:26) So several candidates came into picture. One is in education, other is in healthcare, employment, green energy, these kind of items. And if you take education, there are huge problems, unsolved problems. Very massive. And they're controlled by government, regulations and all those things. So our ability to add value may be very infinitely small. On the other hand, if you take employment, if you provide employment, the person who gets employment get money in hand, that person can spend on education, spend on healthcare and spend on other things. So we felt employment is more important than other things, not to say others are not required.

(1:34:21) So the moment you say employment, we think of using the computer industry experience of doing remotely things. So how we moved from R&D to global R&D. So we are working here. If work can come from United States to Bangalore, 5,000 miles away, why can't work go from Bangalore to Salem which is 200 miles away? There is a thought for which provided you have internet. So employment became the primary criteria of creating social impact. Second is to whom? Could be graduates, could be PhDs, could be engineers, it could be uneducated people, whatever it is. But the maximum impact we thought we can create when we can employ graduates, kind of a situation, because these people spent four years or three years of time, money, the college has spent, the government has spent money and all these things. After graduation, if they don't have a job, it's useless. In fact, he will be in a worse position than uneducated.

(1:35:36) So next thing is where? So it could be in a city, it could be in a village, it could be in a town and all those things. Because of our IT background and internet needs and all things, we said it should be in small towns, not villages, but not cities because city already has so many other opportunities and making people move from small town to city is creating more problems. So we said cities. Within that, 60% of the graduates coming out are women. And the women after education and all those things, they're not allowed to go out of their small town to take up opportunities even if they get it. So women became important. Plus, the fact that women's money in women's hand is spent much more effectively than men. So these are the reasons based on which the purpose was defined as providing gainful employment to graduates in small towns focusing on women. So that's what was the beginning and that's what we do now.

Prakash Mallya: (1:36:47) Wonderful.

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (1:36:48) Today we have 11 centers, 5,000 people are employed. We are a for-profit company, though it's a social venture. And we are profitable from day one. For us, profit is not the motive. So for us, employment is the motive. To get employment, you need to get revenues. To get revenues, you get profits, from revenues, you get profits. Whereas a normal company, you get profits, or you want to get profits for which you need revenues, for which you have to get people. So, very, very interesting.

Prakash Mallya: (1:37:26) And you are an absolute inspiration, Dr. Mitta. You have done a variety of different things in your life and continuing to do it. I'm sure the next generation listening in or watching this episode would take a lot away from this journey of yours which is been a pleasure to talk to you. And we are coming close to the end of the show, Dr. Mitta. So it's been such an inspiring episode for me, and I'm sure for the audience as well. So there is one question that I plan to ask all the guests. It is this one that India's ambition in semiconductors and deep tech is not only about domestic growth, it's about our place in global technology. And if you were to fast forward 10-15 years, what's the most profound way you hope India's success in building this ecosystem will have in the global world order, whether it's in terms of impact it creates or whether it's in terms of human capability improvement.

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (1:38:32) See, from a technologist point of view, I see the line between hardware and software has blurred. Okay. And it is blurred between a chip and a system. Okay. And with artificial intelligence and generative AI coming into picture, so these chips become the delivery mechanism for certain specific tasks or these things. Today we are sitting here and trying to see build a ecosystem to make semiconductors, it's important. But can you make semiconductors which are different from the way others do it? Where the solutions are not specific to high, rich people, but it can be used for so many other people. Because today technology is not inclusive, not kind of everybody who needs it are not getting it. So to make this technology available to everybody in a way they can use it, they can afford it, it has an impact, and at the same time it doesn't have a negative impact.

(1:39:57) So the opportunities are unlimited. Okay. Where India comes into picture is we have this ability to find out what those problems are because we have 1.5 billion people. We know, we have more problems than we can solve. And applying to them and then propagating to the globe will be a great opportunity. As C.K. Prahalad told, you don't have to search for problems in India. We have a million problems. You can choose any problem and solve it.

Prakash Mallya: (1:40:37) Thank you, Dr. Mitta. Thank you all for listening in. Please follow us on Chai & Chips, the channels that you listen to this podcast. We look forward to bringing back several such inspiring episodes in future. Thank you.

Dr. Sridhar Mitta: (1:40:51) Thank you, Prakash.

Prakash Mallya: (1:40:53) Thank you.

(Outro Music Ends) (1:41:43)