The following code shows four ways of creating this equation:
- Unchanged from your question (for comparison).
- Following this solution, I inserted a
\strut directly before the superscript such that the superscript is put to a higher position. Since in this example it is a very small effect, there is
- with a
\Big. instead of the \strut. One can also experiment with \big., \bigg., or \Bigg. (In the first version of this answer, I suggested to use {\Large\strut} which works but produces a warning Command \Large invalid in math mode.)
- Personally, I would not try to write the exponent as an exponent, but rather use a functional notation of the exponential.
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\begin{document}
\begin{align}
I_D&=I_S\left(\mathrm{e}^{\tfrac{q(V+IR_s)}{nN_{ms}N_skT_c}}-1\right) \\
I_D&=I_S\left(\mathrm{e}\strut^{\tfrac{q(V+IR_s)}{nN_{ms}N_skT_c}}-1\right) \\
I_D&=I_S\left(\mathrm{e}\Big.^{\tfrac{q(V+IR_s)}{nN_{ms}N_skT_c}}-1\right) \\
I_D&=I_S\left[\exp\left(\frac{q(V+IR_s)}{nN_{ms}N_skT_c}\right)-1\right]
\end{align}
\end{document}

One note: I replaced e with \mathrm{e}. There are different opinions and language-specific traditions on how to print Euler's constant; you choose of course your preferred way.