Choosing the wrong embedded software development partner is an expensive mistake. Not just in fees: in lost time, delayed launches, IP exposure, and the cost of unpicking work that was not done to the standard your product requires. For hardware companies bringing an embedded product to market, the firmware partner decision sits on the critical path. It deserves more rigour than most teams apply to it.
This article covers what to evaluate when choosing an embedded software development partner, and the specific questions to ask in a supplier conversation – including what good and weak answers look like.
In this guide
- Why embedded software partner selection is different from other outsourcing decisions
- What to look for in an embedded software development partner
- The questions to ask a potential embedded software development partner
- What a good embedded software partnership looks like in practice
- Why choose Bermondsey Electronics as your embedded software development partner?
- FAQs
Why embedded software partner selection is different from other outsourcing decisions
Embedded firmware development is a specialist discipline. It is not a subset of general software development, and a partner with broad software capability does not automatically have the skills your project needs.
Writing firmware requires low-level knowledge of the hardware it runs on: microcontroller architectures, memory constraints, real-time scheduling, interrupt handling, peripheral drivers, and the interaction between software and physical components. These are skills that take years to develop and that a generalist software house cannot credibly claim on the basis of adjacent experience.
The gap between a capable embedded specialist and a software company that occasionally takes on embedded work isn’t about how deeply someone knows a single microcontroller family. Register-level fluency on one chip is a narrower skill than it looks. Engineers who have only ever worked within one architecture often can’t explain why a given design decision becomes expensive three months into a project, because they haven’t seen enough different implementations to know where the cost actually shows up.
Architecture is where the real value gets added. A team that has worked across many chip families, protocols, and project types has seen the same category of decision play out repeatedly, with different outcomes depending on how it was made. That breadth is what lets a partner steer a client toward the fastest, cheapest, or most efficient option for a given constraint, rather than defaulting to whatever they know best. Depth on a specific device still matters once implementation starts. But it’s the breadth of prior projects that determines whether a partner can advise on the decision before any code is written.
This means the evaluation process needs to go deeper than portfolio aesthetics and client lists.
What to look for in an embedded software development partner
Genuine embedded specialism, not adjacent capability
The first question is not whether a partner has done embedded work. Bootloaders, interrupt service routines, hardware abstraction layers, RTOS configuration, low-power state transitions, and peripheral drivers – a credible embedded specialist should be comfortable discussing all of these. If conversations stay at a high level and redirect toward project management language, that is a signal worth taking seriously.
Ask about the range of platforms and project types a partner has actually worked across, not just the ones they know best. Breadth is the more informative signal. A partner who has shipped firmware on Nordic Semiconductor, ESP32, STM32, Zephyr, FreeRTOS, and ThreadX, for example, has seen how the same category of design decision plays out differently depending on the architecture, and is better placed to recommend the right approach for your product rather than defaulting to a familiar one. Fluency on a single platform still matters once a project is underway, but on its own it tells you a candidate can execute in a known environment, not that they can advise on which environment is right in the first place. View our platforms.
A structured development process
A partner’s process is more predictive of outcomes than their portfolio. The most common cause of embedded project delays is not a lack of technical skill – it is a lack of process discipline. Requirements that were never fully specified. Testing deferred to the end of the development cycle. Hardware and firmware development running in sequence rather than in parallel.
Look for evidence of requirements gathering upfront, an agreed test plan before development begins, and testing integrated throughout the cycle rather than treated as a final phase. A partner who cannot describe their process in specific terms probably does not have one.
Testing methodology
Testing is where the quality of an embedded development partner is most clearly revealed – and most frequently misrepresented. End-of-cycle testing is not a testing methodology. It is fault-finding under time pressure.
A strong partner integrates testing throughout development, using test-driven development (TDD), continuous integration, and unit testing to catch problems when they are still small and isolated. For hardware-software integration, hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) testing allows firmware to be verified against a simulated hardware environment before the full system is available.
Don’t just ask whether a partner carries out embedded testing, but when testing starts, what it covers, and what traceability they maintain between test outputs and requirements.
Industry and regulatory experience
If your product operates in a regulated sector, such as medical devices, aerospace, or automotive – the partner needs to have navigated those compliance pathways before. Learning on your project is not an acceptable approach when the regulatory consequences are significant.
For medical devices, look for experience with IEC/ISO 62304 and ISO 13485, and familiarity with FMEA as part of the development process. For aerospace, DO-178C compliance experience matters. For automotive, ISO 26262 and ASIL classification experience is relevant. A partner who can name these standards but cannot explain how they have applied them is not the same as one who has shipped regulated products.
IP protection and contractual clarity
IP ownership in embedded development is more complex than in application software. The deliverables include source code, design files, test procedures, and documentation. At Bermondsey Electronics, all IP vests with the client.
Before any engagement begins, confirm explicitly who owns what. Source code, test outputs, design documentation, and any tooling developed for your project should belong to you. NDAs are necessary but not sufficient – the contract needs to address ownership of all deliverables clearly.
Ability to work as part of a team
Many embedded software engagements are augmentation rather than sole development. An external partner is brought in to fill a platform-specific gap, handle a peak demand period, or provide specialist testing capability alongside an existing in-house team. This model only works if the partner can integrate without friction.
Look for evidence of how a partner has worked alongside in-house teams on previous projects. References from clients where the partner augmented an existing team are more useful than references from clients where the partner was the only developer. View our case studies and learn more about us.
The questions to ask a potential embedded software development partner
These questions are designed to reveal how a partner actually works, not how they describe themselves in a sales conversation. Listen for specificity. Vague answers to specific questions are informative.
- “What is your development process from requirements to first delivery?”
A strong answer describes specific steps: requirements gathering, scope and specification document, test plan agreement, development with continuous testing, and traceability between requirements and test outputs. A weak answer describes methodology at a high level without embedded-specific detail. - “How do you handle firmware development before hardware is stable?”
A strong answer describes simulation environments, development boards, and hardware abstraction layers that allow meaningful firmware work before the production PCB exists. A weak answer assumes hardware availability before development begins, which compresses the firmware timeline and creates schedule risk. - “When does testing start on a project?”
The answer should be: from the beginning. TDD, unit testing, and continuous integration throughout the development cycle. If the answer describes testing as a phase that follows development, that is a process red flag. - “Can you walk me through a project where something went wrong and how you resolved it?”
This is the most revealing question in any supplier evaluation. A partner with real experience will have a specific, detailed answer – describing the failure mode, the diagnosis, and the resolution without deflecting. A partner who struggles to answer this probably lacks experience. - “Who will actually be working on my project?”
The engineers who appear in a sales conversation are not always the engineers who work on the project. Ask specifically who will be assigned, what their experience level is, and whether that changes during the engagement. - “How do you handle requirement changes mid-development?”
A strong answer describes a change control process: assessing the downstream impact on schedule and cost before accepting a change. A weak answer describes flexibility without process, which in practice means scope creep without accountability. - “What do you deliver at the end of an engagement and what does the handover look like?”
You should receive source code, documentation, test outputs, and a traceability matrix. Handover should leave your team able to maintain and develop the firmware independently. Vagueness about deliverables at the evaluation stage tends to persist through the engagement.
Things to watch for
Some signals in a supplier evaluation are worth taking seriously regardless of how strong the rest of the conversation appears:
- Vague answers to specific technical questions: An experienced embedded team will have clear, detailed answers about platforms, failure modes, and process. Redirecting to high-level capability claims rather than specific experience suggests limited depth.
- No clear test plan process: If a partner cannot describe when and how testing is integrated into development, it is probably not integrated at all.
- Portfolio that shows finished products but not engineering complexity: Case studies that describe outcomes without explaining the technical problem that was solved tell you little about what a partner can actually do under pressure.
- Inability to discuss what could go wrong: A partner who only talks about successful outcomes has either limited experience or limited candour – and in embedded development, both carry real risk.
- Junior engineers on senior project descriptions: If the engineers proposed for your project do not match the seniority implied by the portfolio, ask directly before signing anything.
What a good embedded software partnership looks like in practice
A productive embedded software partnership does not feel like a supplier relationship. It feels like an extension of your product development team: engineers who understand your hardware, your constraints, and your commercial timeline, and who integrate into your process without disrupting it.
At Bermondsey Electronics, that is how most of our engagements work. As Dr Mike Fletcher, Technical Manager at one of our long-standing clients, described it:
“Their expert staff have helped to move projects forward quickly and efficiently, augmenting our own in-house development team. For detailed knowledge and speed of response I thoroughly recommend Peter and the team at Bermondsey.”
For Photon Therapeutics, that meant building the embedded software architecture for a UVC infection treatment device from the ground up – including FMEA contribution, safety-critical code isolation, and traceability built in from the start to support a future medical device approval pathway.
For a client in the building industry, it meant diagnosing and resolving a safety-critical fault on a fire safety curtain system without a site visit or physical hardware, by abstracting the I/O and running both MCU applications on the desktop. The problem had been deemed unsolvable by previous providers – and it was resolved without needing the physical equipment on site.
Why choose Bermondsey Electronics as your embedded software development partner?
Bermondsey Electronics has 25 years of experience delivering embedded firmware across aerospace, automotive, medical, security, and health and fitness. We work as an extension of your product development team, following a structured process built around requirements and test planning upfront, TDD throughout, and full traceability from requirements to test outputs.
If you are evaluating embedded software development partners and want to discuss your project with one of our engineers, book a free 30-minute consultation today.
Related blogs
- The Firmware Decisions That Delay Your Product Launch & How to Avoid Them
- Best Practices for Thermal Management in Electronics
- Leveraging AI for Predictive Maintenance in Electronics
- Advances in Industrial Control Systems
- Innovations in Sensor Integration for Smart Devices
FAQs
What should an embedded software development contract include?
At minimum: ownership of all deliverables (source code, design files, test outputs, tooling), scope of work, milestone structure, change control process, and confidentiality obligations. For regulated industries, documentation and traceability requirements should also be addressed explicitly.
How do I protect my IP when working with an external firmware partner?
An NDA is necessary but not sufficient. The development contract should explicitly state that all deliverables are work-for-hire and belong to you – and the partner should have clear processes for repository access, controls, and offboarding before you ask.
What is the difference between outsourcing embedded firmware development and augmenting an in-house team?
Outsourcing means handing a defined scope to an external partner who owns the development process. Augmentation means bringing in an external team to work alongside your own engineers, filling a specific gap without replacing internal capability. Many engagements are a hybrid of both.
When is it better to keep embedded firmware development in-house?
When firmware is your core IP and competitive differentiator, when you have continuous ongoing demand that justifies a permanent team, or when regulatory obligations make external development impractical. For irregular demand or platform-specific skill gaps, an external partner is usually faster and more cost-effective than hiring.
How do I choose an embedded software development company?
Evaluate process as much as portfolio – look for genuine embedded specialism, testing integrated throughout development, relevant platform and regulatory experience, and clear IP terms. Ask specific technical questions and listen for specificity in the answers.
What does an embedded software development partner do?
They design, write, test, and verify the firmware running on your embedded hardware – either across the full development lifecycle or focused on a specific phase or capability gap. The best partners integrate into your existing product development process rather than operating as a separate workstream.
How much does embedded firmware development cost?
Costs vary significantly depending on project complexity, platform, regulatory requirements, and scope. A detailed specification document agreed upfront is the most effective way to get an accurate estimate and avoid budget surprises – discuss your project with our team.
