Estimated reading time: 5 minutes

Elementary, Mr. Watson: PCB Design is a Team Sport (Revisited)

At the Tokyo 2020 Olympics, the U.S. men’s 4x100-meter relay team of Trayvon Bromell, Fred Kerley, Ronnie Baker, and Cravon Gillespie was expected to contend for gold. With some of the fastest sprinters in the world, simply reaching the final seemed almost certain. Instead, the heavily favored team finished sixth in its qualifying heat and failed to advance, missing the final by just two-hundredths of a second. This massive disappointment was not due to a lack of individual speed but to a poorly executed baton exchange between Kerley and Baker, which forced both runners to slow down at the most critical moment.

Four exceptional athletes entered the race, but they did not perform as one connected unit. Their failure demonstrated an important lesson: Bringing talented individuals together and calling them a team does not automatically make them one. Individual ability cannot overcome poor coordination or a failed exchange.

PCB development works much the same way. A company may assemble outstanding specialists, but if information and responsibilities are not exchanged effectively, even the most talented group can fail to reach the finish line.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, I wrote an article for I-Connect007 titled “PCB Design… It’s a Team Sport.” The central insight was that successful PCB design cannot be achieved by one person working in isolation. Like a relay team, PCB development depends on electrical engineers, PCB designers, librarians, mechanical engineers, component specialists, manufacturers, assemblers, test engineers, and quality personnel combining their individual expertise. Each person performs a specialized role, but the product’s success depends on how effectively those roles work together. My insight was correct then and remains just as important today: PCB design is and always will be a team sport.

Today, as I look back, I realize that I did not take my idea far enough. I focused primarily on assembling the right people and encouraging them to cooperate as a team, failing to recognize that team members could still operate within separate departments, use disconnected tools, and move the design from one discipline to another through a series of handoffs. They might belong to the same team while still working in silos.

Even then, the PCB industry was moving beyond that traditional structure. The next step was not simply to improve cooperation among individual specialists, but to create an entire interconnected product development ecosystem. We even came up with a catchy little name for it: co-design. It just rolls off the tongue, doesn’t it?

Co-design describes a connected development process in which every discipline contributes its expertise early enough to influence the product. Instead of electrical engineering, PCB layout, mechanical design, sourcing, manufacturing, assembly, and testing working independently and passing the design from one silo to the next, they operate within a shared environment where information, decisions, and feedback flow in both directions. That is how it works—in theory.

Of course, I can already hear murmuring from my Altium friends in the back of the room: “Isn’t CoDesigner already a feature?” Yes, Altium CoDesigner supports collaboration between ECAD and MCAD. However, the co-design ecosystem I am describing is much broader. It connects not only PCB and mechanical designers but everyone involved in designing, sourcing, manufacturing, testing, supporting, and improving the final product.

What I observed several years ago is still true, but our industry is now moving at the speed of a 2.4 GHz signal. PCB development has become too complex and fast-moving for traditional silos. Higher design densities, shorter schedules, tighter mechanical and thermal constraints, supply-chain instability, and increasing pressure for first-pass success have made late-stage handoffs too costly. At the same time, cloud platforms, shared data, and real-time collaboration tools have enabled earlier connections across disciplines. The industry did not suddenly discover collaboration; product complexity made the ecosystem necessary, and technology made it practical. That is the new reality of our industry.

Like our Olympic sprinters, PCB designers are among the best in the world at what they do. We possess tremendous individual skill, experience, and technical knowledge. But just as speed alone could not carry the U.S. relay team into the final, individual expertise alone cannot guarantee a successful product. Our next challenge is learning to apply that expertise within that cute little connected ecosystem: coordinating with other disciplines, sharing information earlier, and mastering the handoffs that turn outstanding individuals into a successful team.

So, how do we encourage the adoption and implementation of such a co-design ecosystem within our work environments? It begins by recognizing that co-design is not simply another software feature, management initiative, or project management system. It represents a fundamental change in how people communicate, make decisions, and measure success.

Build the Team Before the Design Begins

A co-design team begins by bringing together everyone whose decisions can influence the product: electrical engineering, PCB design, mechanical engineering, sourcing, fabrication, assembly, testing, and quality. Identify them before the design begins, define what each person contributes, and determine when their expertise must be incorporated into the process.

Give the team a shared objective, clear responsibilities, and regular opportunities to identify concerns early. Invite fabricators and assemblers to critical design reviews rather than waiting until the files are released. Create an environment where team members feel comfortable challenging assumptions, identifying risks, and asking how a decision will affect the rest of the product.

The goal is to build better connections. Great co-design teams know who is carrying the baton, who will receive it next, and what must happen to complete every exchange successfully.

Connect Everyone Through a Single Source of Truth
That may sound like common sense, but fractures within a team often begin with the flow of information. The project starts with one baton. Then someone creates a second spreadsheet, another person saves a separate copy of the design, and an important decision becomes buried in an email. Before long, the team is carrying several batons and, like our ill-fated Olympic team, heading home without qualifying.

Just creating a single source of truth is not enough; the team must commit to using it. Assign ownership of the information, make it easily accessible, and establish clear rules for where files, requirements, decisions, comments, and revisions are maintained. Conduct reviews using the live source, record decisions there, and retire outdated files so they cannot quietly re-enter the project.

The principle is simple: If information affects the product, it belongs in the shared system, not in someone’s inbox, personal folder, or memory. A co-design team succeeds when everyone knows where the baton is, whether it is current, and who is responsible for carrying it forward.

Turn Individual Expertise Into Shared Product Success
Some believe that such a co-design ecosystem diminishes individual expertise, but the opposite is true: It gives that expertise a greater purpose. The electrical engineer, PCB designer, mechanical engineer, sourcing specialist, fabricator, assembler, and test engineer each bring knowledge that the others may not possess. The goal is to connect that knowledge so every decision strengthens the complete product.

That will require change (no matter how dreaded) and a change in how success is measured. Completing the schematic, layout, enclosure, or fabrication package should not be considered a victory if the product later experiences sourcing problems, manufacturing delays, test failures, or an expensive redesign. Success belongs to the entire team and should be measured by the final result: product performance, manufacturability, cost, schedule, reliability, and first-pass success.

Make this practical by establishing shared product goals at the beginning, reviewing risks as a team, and recognizing people who prevent problems even when those problems fall outside their immediate responsibilities. Encourage every team member to ask, “How will my decision affect the next person and the final product?”

The fastest individual runner does not win the relay. That’s for the team that successfully carries the baton across the finish line.

This column originally appeared in the August 2026 issue of I-Connect007 Magazine.