Are current project management methodologies really lean and serving its purposes to challenge the aggressive changes and time to market targets?

V Model is also well known as the Verification and Validation (V&V) Model, which was introduced in the 80s in response to the limitations of the conventional waterfall model. It splits the product/project development process into decided phases: requirements analysis, system design, architecture design, module design, coding, and corresponding testing phases. Each development phase is directly associated with a testing phase, creating a visual representation that stresses the importance of V&V at each step. This model is particularly useful in environments where requirements are well-defined and unlikely to change. Does these models were right fits and helps today's development battle ground in terms of cost & time?

If we go with the V model approach….

HW requitements have to be frozen first and remain fixed throughout development. This approach worked in an era where semiconductor architectures get advanced on average of half decade cycles. Emerging automotive industry is trying to apply the same logic to compute hardware that chances every alternate year. By the time a vehicle reaches production, most of the semiconductors might be outdated!!!? This leads product locked into past technology and shorting the life span while others smart adopters move forward.

If we consider similar approach and flow for software from requirements till release., this won’t fit for SDV framework. Since it requires constant iteration, real-time updates, and OTA preparations. The classical term or concept called final software release has been outdated!!

Development still treats system integration as a final stage task when it should be stuffed into development from day one with desired understanding.? In the name of agile model., assuming continuous integration and testing solves and covers all our expected real field conditions and improves the development efficiency!!! On top of these., still not sure how to handle next level product requirements like Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) in the integrations!!!

Limitations of the V Model - Rigidity Concerns

The V-Model assumes that most vehicle systems operate in isolation. That might have been true when a vehicle domain ECUs controlled only what was inside the vehicle without any interconnections among. But today, modern vehicles are fully networked, exchanging real-time data with ECUs, edge processors, cloud services, and even other vehicles.

Fact is., V-Model wasn’t designed for an era of constant change were quite normal and stringent development cost factors.? It was built for a world where predictability was the goal. But today, software moves much quicker than hardware, networked systems and its dictate performance. Market and development that continue forcing modern vehicle development into a structure built for the past are setting themselves up for failure.

Actually., Agile methodology is highly flexible and adaptable until enforce our own customizations!!? It allows for changes to be made throughout the development process, enabling teams to respond to evolving requirements and customer feedback. On the other hand, the V Model is less flexible and adaptable. Once a particular phase is completed, it is rigorous to make changes without going back to the previous phase. This can be a limitation in situations where requirements are likely to change frequently.

By the way., this V Model been reiterated into many forms as like their convenience as an extension of the traditional waterfall model with Agile flavors!! So, this self-customization approach in a software development that emphasizes a bit more complex structure and extended process into their own way and timeline. Each phase of development corresponds with a specific testing phase, ensuring that quality assurance is integrated from the beginning. When it comes into the term quality., it is very important “Just because something worked in the bench, it didn’t mean it was effective out on the road”.

What will be the right fit?

Agile and V Model are two distinct project development methodologies, each with its own set of attributes and strengths.? Without right underrating of these methodologies, plain differences emerge in their approach to project management will not give any of our really needed outcomes. However, aggressive changes and time to market targets needs flexibility and simplified mechanism in terms of handling requirements and dynamic environments.

By considering the project size, understanding the unique demands of the development context, and employing best practices, team can effectively leverage the strengths of the V Model while mitigating its limitations. Ultimately, the decision to utilize the V Model should realigned with the specific needs and goals of the project at hand.? The choice between Agile or waterfall or V Model depends on the specific project nature and requirements, organizational culture and the level of flexibility and adaptability when it is needed.

Conclusion

Increasing project complexity makes the consequences of getting things wrong, massive!! On top of this., performance bottlenecks, last-minute debugging confusion, cybersecurity vulnerabilities, and software rollouts that don’t reflect real world conditions. Inline with this our process or model should be lean and must give the clear focus and deserve towards customer needs and over their experiences. Rathor dumping all known outdated tuffs and expertise into the development in the name of process and methods. Model should allow as well as control for better estimation and planning, reducing the risk of delays and budget overruns.

This is no longer about who bakes the best cake or who has the larger in size with 100% perfection. Success is being defined by something entirely different: who controls the software, who optimizes the compute, and who builds a product that can evolve long after it leaves the plant.

The winners of this race aren’t the ones throwing more processors at the problem. They’re the ones …

1. Designing smarter architectures, more efficient systems, and faster iteration cycles.
2. Solving power efficiency before it forces a costly redesign.
3. Treating software integration as a foundational discipline, not a reconsideration.
4. Designing compute platforms that are as adaptable as the software that runs on them.

Current automotive industry is not evolving—It’s Being Rewritten!!! The ‘Unique Ideas’ that motivated us were that we had to fight and win through. These ideas prompted us to consider how we could meet existing needs and gain an advantage to retain our presence in the ground.