Myths of aSPICE 3 - The Real Cost of aSPICE

Welcome to Part 3 of our series, Myths of aSPICE. Today, we’re diving into a topic that many of you—and especially your managers—are eager to discuss: the cost of aSPICE.

Understanding the True Cost of aSPICE

First and foremost, let’s acknowledge that cost is a tricky subject. Many people mistakenly conflate the cost of aSPICE with the cost of applying sound engineering techniques tailored to their specific circumstances.

In Part 1 of this series, we explored the foundational principles that shape engineering decisions. Now, let’s bring that context into focus:

• We work in safety-critical embedded development
• We manage large-scale integration and series production
• Our environment dictates what’s necessary and appropriate

It's essential to recognize that implementing aSPICE isn’t at all about writing requirements and architectural design or performing any analysis or verification. These activities stem from fundamental engineering principles and are necessary for the industry.

If you’re not an OEM, these processes are mandated regardless. You must create requirements, establish architectural designs, test, and verify your product. So instead of blaming aSPICE, give it credit for guiding you through these essential tasks.

Where Do You Start?

Before discussing cost, let’s assess your starting point.

Are you already ISO 9001/TS/IATF-certified? If so, you likely have most of the foundational processes in place. But let’s be honest—these certifications often serve as corporate window dressing rather than a functional advantage.

So, what’s your actual starting point?

• Do you need to pass an aSPICE assessment?
• Are you implementing aSPICE because you see its value?

The Worst-Case Scenario

The worst-case scenario looks something like this:

• You signed a contract requiring aSPICE compliance (VDA scope, L2) before SOP—a common automotive R&D requirement.
• You ignored it. Maybe you prioritized prototyping and a working solution first. Maybe you dismissed it as "just documentation" or "a formality."
• Suddenly, SOP is looming, and an assessment is scheduled.
• You realize you’re facing penalties, massive rework, and reverse engineering costs.
• You end up paying far more than necessary, losing the intended benefits of aSPICE but experiencing all the costs and pain.

The takeaway? Don’t blame aSPICE. Blame yourself.

A More Common Scenario

A more typical (but still flawed) approach looks like you start a new project and proactively investigate aSPICE. And you start to implement what you think aSPICE is in project.

What are you missing, is understanding, that in reality you have 2 projects in paralel:

• You develop a pilot project (a real project that needs aSPICE)
• You also have a project of creation of aSPICE processes

Without this in your mind, you will never understand real cost of aSPICE

Now, let’s clarify another, often-misunderstood concept: the Process Owner.

If you’re blaming quality management (QM) for Excel checklists instead of DevOps automation, you’re pointing fingers in the wrong direction. QM teams don’t want to be Process Owners—you’re forcing them into the role.

Each process should have a senior expert as the Process Owner. This person:

• Selects the toolchain
• Chooses engineering approaches
• Defines quality criteria

QM merely supports this role, ensuring compliance, but it’s up to the Process Owner to determine how to achieve the required standards.

That said, in a pilot project, the Process Owners won’t be doing all the work themselves—they’re busy with all responsibilities. But what are the risks when you will let aSPICE to the regullar workers in the project instead bringing your A - Players onboard?

Guess what, the result could be... less than ideal...

The Agile Nature of aSPICE

aSPICE isn’t rigid—it encourages iteration. You can test methodologies and toolchains, explore process performance objectives, and refine activities over time. But remember: Process Owners is the driver of this.

The Real Cost of aSPICE

Now, let’s break down the real costs:

1. The Cost of Process Development

Creating standard aSPICE processes is a one-time expense for the organization. These costs should not be allocated to a single project, especially not a pilot project.

This is the big investment, you have to write it, test it and pilot it to see if it works. It is experimentation and aso finding of wrong solutions befor the right ones.

Note that nobody wrote good process from table on first try. You have to use it, and than bring what is good back to the process and itterate on what is not grat.

But, when you have templates ready, engineering approaches selected and toolchain set up, there is not much left to do...... besides Iterate again.

2. Personnal training Costs

Learning aSPICE is like learning any new tool. Think about how long it takes to get proficient with:

• Enterprise Architect
• A new code editor, or new library, not speaking about new programming language.
• Any other engineering tool

aSPICE is no different. It requires training, which takes time and money.

However, here’s the good news: training is a one-time investment per person and role. Once employees understand aSPICE, toolchains, and templates, there’s no additional cost.

So don’t count training as an ongoing aSPICE cost—it’s a general training expense, like any other professional development.

3. The Project-Level Cost of aSPICE

This is where the real discussion starts.

aSPICE forces you to perform activities you might otherwise neglect. The actual cost depends on how you frame these activities:

• From a product lifecycle perspective: Tasks like traceability, documentation, and verification seem tedious—but they pay off when debugging or reusing components.
• From a risk perspective: Proper documentation is insurance. If legal or safety issues arise, you’ll be grateful for the records.

Yes, it feels like paperwork and bureaucracy. But in a crisis—whether it’s a warranty claim, insurance dispute, or legal case—being able to prove your work was sound and correct is invaluable.

Key Takeaways

1. Process development costs should not be assigned to the pilot project. It’s a company-wide investment.
2. Training costs are a one-time expense per person and role. Think of it as professional development, not an aSPICE cost.
3. aSPICE costs in projects come from additional activities, but these activities create long-term value.
4. Processes exist for bad times, not just good ones. When problems arise, aSPICE ensures you’re prepared.

Final Thought

Let experienced professionals help you design your processes. Choose your Process Owners wisely—because in the end, the quality of your aSPICE implementation depends on them.

aSPICE is what you make of it. Build it right, and you’ll reap the benefits.

Petr