Have we overestimated platform maturity?
According to Gartner, 80% of large software organizations will have platform engineering teams in place by 2026 (up from 45% in 2022), with many companies embracing standardized approaches to develop their products at greater scale and speed.
However, embedded software development is still heavily reliant on custom engineer-to-order (ETO) builds. In August 2024, the study commissioned by Qt Group and conducted by Forrester Consulting found that 63% of embedded code is created via custom, project-based development, with this approach especially prevalent in the motor vehicles sector (66.3%).
Given the perceived maturity of internal development platforms, why is the majority of embedded software still developed via custom solutions?
Battling Legacy Restraints, Security Demands, and Complexity
From ever-changing hardware specifications and bespoke product designs to specific industrial demands and engineering needs, all-in-one embedded software systems are complex platforms created for complex uses. Development teams have, therefore, traditionally used custom approaches when building embedded systems because ready-made software solutions do not easily meet their unique requirements.
What’s more, embedded software solutions center on an intricate interplay between hardware and software. Due to the different life cycles and engineering disciplines of software and hardware products, many companies have found it simpler to build the two elements separately from scratch.
Software development is very fragmented with lots of different tools used in different ways, says Pekka Lähteinen, Industry Process Consultant at Dassault Systèmes. Hardware development is much slower and longer than the software product life cycle, so connecting software to hardware has always been challenging.
Lähteinen also notes that changing existing company behavior and eliminating legacy processes is especially difficult in complex sectors. As a result, he believes that development teams often revert to the ‘easier’ option, which, surprisingly for embedded software, is a custom build, as
you don't need to change anything, and you don't have to follow rules or processes; you just do it.
Eva Rio, Portfolio Manager at Finnish software company Tuxera, agrees.
A lot of the hurdles to adopting a platform approach are related to already established processes and systems that companies have in place. Some of these companies might be afraid of having compatibility issues in the long run and might not necessarily see the benefit that a platform approach can bring to them.
Compatibility issues, such as diverse architectures or communication protocols, can hinder a platform approach. What’s more, custom development offers a greater degree of adaptability and alignment with complex requirements (e.g., intricate product specifications for sophisticated industrial machines), which makes it easier in the short term to ensure compliance with safety and security demands (e.g., protecting IoT devices from cyberattacks).
However, there comes a tipping point when organizations try to develop custom products at scale.
Custom builds may be easier to manage, says Lähteinen, but eventually you end up with a lot of custom builds which are not manageable.
Embracing Standardization
From furniture to electronics, much of today’s manufacturing has embraced standardized platform approaches where engineers adapt an out-of-the-box solution to suit their bespoke needs.
Unlike bespoke development, standardized platform solutions offer higher quality at scale, greater development speed, and reduced costs. With pre-designed and standardized components, for instance, even junior developers can tailor ready-made templates with built-in code to customers’ specifications, enabling small teams to deliver a stronger output and reduce lead times. For example, Blue Ctrl switched to a platform approach by using Qt to build its internal development platform, allowing one single engineer to deliver a project in just three months from the contract date.
A standardized platform approach also improves the quality and maintenance of the final product. Rigorous quality control irons out errors that occur on a per-project basis, and vendor support for the base components ensures rapid solutions and updates.
However, this level of standardization usually comes at the expense of flexibility and adaptability, which complex embedded software systems need.
Balancing Customization and Standardization
90% of manufacturing executives consider agility and flexibility the keys to success. In embedded software development, customization provides more flexibility, but standardization provides increased agility. So, what is the right balance?
A hybrid approach is the optimal way to move forward, says Rio. Companies that use a hybrid model will have more flexibility and can still meet economies of scale while fulfilling specific needs. It’s also more future-proof as you can make modular updates to address emerging use cases.
Lähteinen also believes a hybrid approach is most practical for embedded software development.
It's impossible to have fully standardized approach, says Lähteinen. Most companies should look to standardize 80% of development and customize 20%, so you standardize most things but leave some areas which can be varied based on the industry or company.
For Lähteinen, the development sweet spot can be found with proper system engineering management. By understanding the system-level and discipline-level architecture, as well as the configuration of the different technology setups and product variations, organizations can better manage embedded software development.
Meanwhile, Rio recommends that companies seeking to balance customization and standardization in their embedded software strategies should first decide on the most important factor for that project.
It can be reliability, speed, cost, or performance, she says. Then use that as a pillar or framework to make any development decisions.
Ultimately, embedded software is like any other manufacturing process: it’s about creating a high-quality product in the most effective manner for that product.
By taking into account specific project needs, hardware constraints, and long-term strategic goals, the embedded software industry can strike the perfect balance between custom engineering and a platform approach—for each product.
.webp?width=850&name=Forrester-mockup-updated01%20(1).webp)