ASPICE assessments and ISO 26262 audits care less about whether your team writes good requirements than about whether you can prove it. Can you trace every safety goal to its technical safety requirements? Can you show that each requirement has been verified? Can you demonstrate that a change to a sensor interface specification was evaluated for impact across software, hardware, and system-level artifacts?
Most teams can answer those questions in time, given enough engineers pulling together evidence from scattered documents and disconnected tools. The problem is that “in time” doesn’t work during an ASPICE assessment or when an OEM customer demands compliance evidence on a compressed timeline. The gap between having traceability and being able to demonstrate traceability under audit pressure is where most requirements tools either prove their value or expose their limitations.
This guide evaluates nine requirements management platforms through the lens of automotive compliance readiness. I’ve focused on how each platform handles the specific demands that ASPICE process areas and ISO 26262 functional safety impose on requirements workflows, because that’s where the real differences between tools surface.
