“The Ability to Produce Is Just as Important as the Ability to Innovate.”

By Tsu-Jae Liu, Sara Frueh

In July 2025, Tsu-Jae Liu became president of the National Academy of Engineering. A distinguished engineer and academic leader, Liu is renowned for her contributions in the field of microelectronics, which include codeveloping the FinFET transistor design that is used in all leading-edge computer chips and smartphones today. 

Since 1996 Liu has been on the faculty of the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences at the University of California, Berkeley. She has also served in various administrative leadership positions at the university, most recently as dean of the College of Engineering from July 2018 through June 2025. She served on the board of directors of Intel from 2016 to 2025.

Liu spoke with Issues editor Sara Frueh about the importance of ethics in engineering education, how the United States can meet the current need for more engineers in its workforce, and the role policy should play in maintaining American competitiveness.

What drew you to a career in engineering, and specifically to working with semiconductors?

Liu: In elementary and high school I did wonder if medicine would be a good fit for me, because it helps people directly. But I learned early on, between high school and college, that I had no stomach for biology and organic chemistry. It was just not interesting or appealing to me. But I enjoyed math and physics and so I was drawn to engineering.

Also, I knew that, pragmatically, engineers could make a good living. My parents are both scientists. We learned a lot of science from them growing up, but we also learned that scientists don’t make a lot of money. That influenced me to consider more pragmatic career paths, such as engineering. I also knew that engineers do good, right? They develop devices, systems that people use, that doctors use to help people. So what really drew me to engineering is that it helps people.

As for semiconductors, well, I grew up near Silicon Valley in the 1970s and ’80s, when the industry was just developing and growing. It was an exciting time for semiconductors. When I was in high school I went to a trade show, and I saw people really excited about their work and the impact that it had. I also had an opportunity to visit the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center. I got to see some very advanced, innovative concepts of devices, like personal computers. And that also influenced me to consider going into the high-tech industry.

You were the head of the engineering school at the University of California, Berkeley, at a time when computing and artificial intelligence was changing everything. Given the broad impact of these technologies, how are the ethical expectations for engineers changing?

Liu: Ethics has always been ingrained into an engineering education, and any accredited engineering program has a requirement that students develop an understanding and appreciation for ethics. But traditionally, computer science was separate from engineering—even computer engineering—so it didn’t require ethics as part of the training.

Now advances in computer science—like the rise of cyber-physical systems, and the increasing dependence of people and society on devices or other products programmed by computer scientists—have made it apparent that ethics really should be deliberately ingrained into computer science education as well. A lot of schools have already started to do that.

Advances in computer science have made it apparent that ethics really should be deliberately ingrained into computer science education.

As people and society become more dependent on—and influenced by—technology, it becomes critical for engineers to consider not only the ethical and environmental aspects, but also the social and cultural impacts of their innovations. The National Academy of Engineering’s Cultural, Ethical, Social and Environmental Responsibility in Engineering (CESER) program aims to address this need in both engineering education and practice, by engaging with practitioners, educators, and the public.

You’ve spent time in industry and on corporate boards. Has that changed your perspective on engineering education?

Liu: Yes. It changed my perception of engineering education in a couple of ways. First, I realized there is a mismatch between the pace of technological advancement and the pace of innovation in education. It is difficult for schools to develop curricula that keep up with the changing needs of industry, which makes it more difficult for companies to find talent with the knowledge and skills they need. This requires companies to invest additional time in training new hires before they are able to fully contribute.

To achieve closer alignment between educational program student outcomes and industry workforce requirements, there’s a need for greater collaboration between educators and companies. This is reflected in the America’s Talent Strategy report, released jointly by the Departments of Commerce, Education, and Labor in August 2025.

Second, I realized there’s just not enough talent to go around. Companies are competing against each other to recruit and retain engineers, which takes time and money. We need to promote collaboration to enable more universities, more colleges, and more trade schools to contribute to closing the talent gap.

This is starting to happen in certain regions of the country, incentivized by funding from the federal government and local and state governments. But industry leadership is key: It has to be driving these collaborative education and workforce development efforts as public-private partnerships.

Within the semiconductor industry, Intel has been a major supporter of collaborative efforts in Ohio that include K–12, community colleges, state universities, and private universities. I think similar efforts are needed in other sectors of industry and regions of the country to meet the engineering workforce needs of the country.

Are there other things we can do to increase the number of people who become engineers?

Liu: Yes, absolutely. I really think that we can do more to support the success of students pursuing engineering careers. Companies can share best practices for fostering collaboration between industry, academia, and K–12 educators to improve understanding and appreciation for engineering as a profession.

There is a mismatch between the pace of technological advancement and the pace of innovation in education.

In this country, a lot of students don’t learn about engineering until they go to college. But many students don’t go to college after graduating from high school—at least not right away. So that’s an untapped potential pool of talent that educators and industry leaders should try to reach.

We can work together to spread the word about engineering—how it’s all about using a lot of creativity and innovation to come up with new ways of improving life for people and benefitting society, and that it’s fun and rewarding.

That means changing the conversation about engineering, toward asking what we can do to support more students to succeed, rather than saying, as we have traditionally, that engineering is only for people who are good at math and science. That’s the wrong way to start. It should be more like: “Who’s interested in helping invent new things that will solve problems for people?”

Fortunately, in many universities now the engineering education culture has changed from the “sink or swim” approach that was common when I was younger to what we call a growth mindset. We know that human brains are continually adapting and learning, and so anybody, given enough time and support, can succeed in pursuing engineering study.

If there are students who want to help create new solutions to society’s most pressing challenges by becoming engineers, we should work together as a community to support their success. How can we help them gain the math skills they need and learn the science they need to be able to succeed?

What role does engineering play in the competitive global technology landscape right now?

Liu: Engineering is the engine of innovation. It plays a crucial role in the technologically dependent society we live in today, and with the advent of AI, it is only going to grow in significance.

We need to actually produce the innovative products invented here in order to sustain technological leadership.

Staying at the forefront of technology innovation requires more engineering talent and a public that is more technologically literate. In a highly competitive global economy, we need to actually produce the innovative products invented here in order to sustain technological leadership. In other words, the ability to produce is just as important as the ability to innovate. If we can’t translate new ideas and new solutions into practical benefit for the nation, then the United States will be at a tremendous disadvantage in this competitive landscape.

What’s at stake for the United States in staying competitive and maintaining our leadership, beyond just winning a race against other countries? What’s the practical importance for Americans?

Liu: If the United States is completely dependent on other countries for things that we need to live and work—just to operate—that puts the nation’s welfare and prosperity at risk. For example, during the pandemic, supply chain issues with the production of semiconductor chips disrupted the US economy and contributed to rising inflation and lost revenue opportunities for American companies. To put it mildly! Supply chain resilience and security are critical for economic stability.

Fundamentally, the United States needs to maintain technology competitiveness to ensure long-term economic prosperity and national security, and ultimately to preserve American values like democracy and freedom of expression.

Can you say more about that? How do you see the link between technology development and our ability to protect our democracy?

Liu: Technology has tremendous power to influence people—what we believe and how we behave—in just about every aspect of modern life. All the democratic processes in our society are ultimately dependent on information. We’ve seen how social media can influence people’s beliefs and actions. So there is a lot at stake for our democracy, and for national and economic security, if we don’t stay ahead in the development of information technology, including cybersecurity and AI. It is quite possible for adversaries who want to unduly influence people to impact our democratic processes.

By leading in foundational technologies, the United States not only drives economic growth but also shapes international norms, standards, and governance frameworks. Ceding that ground to another country risks a future in which digital infrastructure, data governance, and AI ethics reflect authoritarian rather than democratic values.

The other important area where technology development is linked to democracy is cislunar space exploration and governance. Any company or country that can keep track of anything that’s happening on Earth at any time, any place, will have an economic advantage as well as a military advantage. So that’s clearly going to be a threat to the future of our nation, if we are not leaders in the space race.

What role does government policy have in supporting our competitiveness?

We can’t rely purely on market forces for industries to develop new technologies for the benefit of society.

Liu: It plays an important role. If other countries like China have governments that are directly influencing the way that technology is being developed—beyond just pure market forces—then the United States has to adapt to remain competitive. Now China has probably taken the lead in multiple emerging, strategically important areas of technology, including batteries, electric vehicles, electric grid modernization.

We can’t rely purely on market forces for industries to develop new technologies for the benefit of society. Companies are beholden to their shareholders to maximize their return on investment, and that doesn’t always translate into the best interests of the nation. This is where leaders in the US government should consider how to incentivize companies to develop technologies and manufacture products in a way that will ultimately assure the nation’s long-term welfare and prosperity—even as they are continuing to benefit the companies themselves.

The National Academy of Engineering can bring together leaders from across industry, academia, and government, in a way that no other organization can.

In a lot of ways—rapid advances in AI and unprecedented global competition, to name a couple—engineering and technology are entering uncharted territories. Is there a special role for the National Academy of Engineering in helping the nation navigate issues like these?

Liu: The National Academies are, I think, unique in multiple aspects. First of all, I don’t know of any other similar nonprofit, independent organization whose mission is to advance the welfare of the nation. And no other institution has the same power to convene leaders and subject-matter experts across the fields of engineering, science, and medicine, to bring their expertise to bear on matters of national importance—that’s a superpower of the Academies.

Many of today’s global challenges require multidisciplinary solutions, as well as contributions from multiple industries. The National Academy of Engineering can bring together leaders from across industry, academia, and government, in a way that no other organization can, to help accelerate the solutions to these challenges. If we can promote collaboration, I think we can solve these problems more effectively, more efficiently. And that’s what I hope to achieve in my current role at the National Academies.

Before we go, I want to loop back to your own work with semiconductors. I’m curious how it feels to be an inventor of something so ubiquitous – to look around at people using their phones and computers and know that you created a transistor used in nearly all of them. How does it feel to be an inventor?

Liu: Well, it’s certainly very gratifying to know that something that you helped to develop as part of a team has had such tremendous, transformative impact on people in society. That’s what makes engineering such a fulfilling profession. But the thing is, you can’t really predict what your impact on society will be. All you can do is enjoy the journey—enjoy discovering and inventing new things and working together with other people who really want to help solve problems to make a positive difference.