Our customer is an internationally active manufacturer of premium vehicles. It produces and sells automobiles as well as motorcycles in the upper market segment. The company is known for sporty, dynamic vehicles, innovative powertrain technologies, and a strong brand identity. In addition to classic internal combustion engines, the Group invests heavily in e-mobility, digital connectivity, and automated driving functions. The products are sold worldwide, supported by a global production and sales network.
As part of several series-production and innovation projects, the manufacturer faced growing challenges in implementing the ASPICE requirements at maturity level 2–3.
Initial situation
The customer developed highly complex vehicle architectures with a rapidly growing share of software. The development landscape was characterized by:
- a large number of international development sites
- numerous Tier 1 and Tier 2 suppliers
- parallel agile and traditional development models
- heterogeneous toolchains for requirements, architecture, testing, and configuration management
Despite formally defined processes, internal assessments revealed recurring weaknesses, leading to higher development costs and gaps in quality assurance.
Identified challenges
1. Incomplete traceability
Bidirectional traceability from system requirements through to software tests was not consistently ensured. Tool breaks led to manual handovers and inconsistencies.
2. Supplier integration
Different ASPICE maturity levels and process interpretations among suppliers led to quality deviations and increased coordination effort.
3. Agile integration into ASPICE
Agile development approaches were established; however, clear rules for formal documentation, review evidence, and baseline definitions in accordance with ASPICE were missing.
4. Varying process maturity across projects
Innovation projects and series development showed differing levels of process discipline, resulting in inconsistent audit results.
Customer solution
The goal was to establish a consistent process landscape at ASPICE Level 2 while simultaneously integrating user-oriented development models in a practical way.
As part of the transformation, clear governance structures were established, standardized artifact templates were introduced, and an end-to-end traceability strategy was implemented. User-oriented development models were adapted so that they are revision-proof and audit-ready in compliance with ASPICE. Process deviations were reduced and transparency across system, software, and test levels was increased.
The result: higher process stability, improved supplier quality, and sustainable audit readiness in development projects at ECU and software level.
