Platform engineering has been hailed for its potential to transform software development through automation, self-service options, and streamlined workflows. However, recent findings suggest that it is not meeting expectations in the realm of embedded software.

A study conducted by Forrester Consulting, commissioned by Qt Group, highlights a significant gap between the perceived maturity of platform engineering strategies and their actual execution. The research surveyed 317 decision-makers and influencers, revealing that 63% of embedded software in organizations adopting platform engineering is still developed using custom, ad hoc solutions. This is surprising given that 65% of participants regard their platform as foundational to embedded software development, with ongoing initiatives aimed at enhancing capabilities and increasing automation.

This disparity underscores the delicate balance that embedded teams must maintain as they strive to boost productivity while adhering to rigorous quality and safety standards.

Quality as a Key Motivation for Platform Engineering

The main motivation for embedded teams to adopt platform engineering is the desire for improved quality. Notable benefits associated with this approach include:

• Enhanced Customer Experience (68%): Achieved through the delivery of reliable, high-quality software.
• Better Compliance with Standards and Security (56%): Ensuring adherence to industry regulations.
• Strengthened Brand Identity (57%) and Increased Workflow Efficiency (54%): Resulting from streamlined processes that promote a consistent product experience.

Despite these advantages, many embedded developers face challenges in balancing the reusability of standardized, high-quality components with the need to customize platforms for various use cases and hardware configurations. Nearly half (49%) of developers report difficulties in achieving this balance.

The study identifies several specific pain points:

• 51% struggle to work across different devices, operating systems, and hardware.
• 44% cite a lack of unified UI/UX design processes for accessibility and inclusivity in embedded systems.
• 41% encounter obstacles in cross-functional collaboration throughout design, development, testing, and deployment stages.
• 43% have trouble maintaining self-service capabilities for most use cases.

Despite these challenges, there is some optimism: 93% of respondents indicate that their company leadership continues to support existing platform engineering strategies.

The Demand for Flexible Frameworks

Juhapekka Niemi, SVP at Qt Group, notes the disparity between the perceived maturity of platform engineering strategies and the actual benefits being realized. He points out that much of the work remains manual, particularly in sectors like medtech, automotive, and industrial automation.

Niemi calls for a shift in approach: “Platforms should be designed to accommodate change, integrate with emerging technologies, and function across various hardware and software environments. It’s essential to leverage a flexible, scalable framework and utilize optimized cross-platform components that can be easily deployed.”

Adding to these technical challenges is a persistent skills gap. Half of the respondents (50%) identify a shortage of talent as a major barrier to effective platform strategies, with other significant hurdles including legacy platform integration (49%) and cultural resistance from product teams (34%).

Maurice Kalinowski, Product Director at Qt Group, remarks on the dual challenges faced by embedded engineers. They must comprehend the end-user experience for technical machines while also competing with web developers who specialize in usability. These web developers often face steep learning curves when adapting to the complexities of embedded systems, which increases the demand for standardized solutions.

Importance of Tool Selection for Platform Engineering

The study emphasizes the crucial role of selecting the right tools in developing a successful platform engineering strategy. Respondents overwhelmingly favor tools that offer strong integration capabilities and robust security features.

More than half (52%) prioritize specialized, best-of-breed tools that seamlessly integrate with their existing technology stacks, while just over a third (35%) prefer comprehensive, all-in-one solutions. This focus on integration is vital for incorporating specialized security tools within a development framework to ensure robust protection without sacrificing performance.

Additionally, 49% of respondents view safety, security, and compliance as essential outcomes of their platform engineering strategies, and approximately 43% highlight the significance of customizable APIs for third-party integrations.

Miao Luo, Director of Technology Strategy at Qt Group, states, “Different APIs come with varying agreements and latency times, which can expose systems to security risks and privacy challenges. Developers must ensure that third-party software handles sensitive data appropriately. The best way to manage this risk is to monitor technical debt closely and minimize the use of third-party components.”