Development Interface Agreement (DIA) - A deep dive





 How important is the DIA? This was the question one of our team members asked us when we started reviewing a DIA. It is a simple yet profound question, for there are a lot of nuances to be unpacked as part of the answer.

<< Assumption for the article: We are standing in the shoes of a Tier-1 supplier. For a Tier-1, their customer is the OEM. This implies that the DIA will be between the Tier-1 and OEM FuSa managers. >>

Straight up, the DIA is the first document with which we start discussions with the customer. The discussions on the DIA should ideally start at the RFI/RFQ stage itself. Starting the DIA at the RFI/RFQ stage ensures that the work products agreed upon with the customer are properly estimated (time and money) during the quote. This, in turn, means that the Tier-1 is able to plan their work accordingly.

As an example, we had an OEM who asked us to perform FMEDA calculations for an ASIL-A program. (I’m sure you are all aware that FMEDA becomes mandatory only from ASIL-C.) We did the most logical thing — we discussed with the OEM why they wanted to do FMEDA for an ASIL-A program (refer to Note #1 below). The OEM had their own reasons for wanting it, and hence we went ahead with the second most logical thing — to plan for this activity in our overall project plan. We had to estimate the effort required for the FMEDA activity, plan the activity in our HW and FuSa development timelines, and deliver the results to the OEM at regular milestones.

As you could guess by this time, the DIA is one of the critical inputs for planning the future course of action in the project.


Note #1: An important lesson that we have learned from numerous projects is that we need to have multiple discussions with the OEM on the DIA. The ISO 26262 standard — unfortunately — is not black and white, but written with a lot of shades of grey. This means that there are some work products and requirements prone to different interpretations. Due to this interpretation mismatch, it becomes necessary for us to discuss and align on expectations.

Many times — once we have an open discussion with our customers — we are able to understand each other and fine-tune the work products required for the project. This upfront discussion on the DIA ensures that we spend our effort on FuSa for the most critical things, and not end up doing work that has no significant effect on the safety of the product.


The second critical aspect of the DIA is the decision on which documents would be shared with the OEM and which would not be. Why is this important?

Some documents contain the intellectual property (IP) of a Tier-1 (like the HW schematic or the HW Bill of Material (BOM)), and Tier-1s are definitely not fine with sharing them as-is with an OEM. Then, there are documents containing sensitive information (like the FMEA). A Tier-1 might not be willing to wash their dirty linen in front of the OEM. (Which OEM would be happy to see that their ECU supplier has basic process issues?)

Due to the reasons listed above, it is essential that discussions happen upfront about the documents that would be shared, the format in which they would be shared, and the sharing methodology. Some of the common sharing methodologies we have seen are:

  1. Full: The entire document would be shared.
  2. Report: Only a summary of the document would be provided.
  3. Online only: Shared through a conference call; no copies are sent.
  4. At Tier-1 premises only: The OEM can view the document only at the Tier-1 premises.
  5. Last but not least, the good old N/A: (Not applicable, of course 😉)

A small, related aspect is that we have also seen certain OEMs and Tier-1s include work products that are not part of the ISO 26262 work product list in their DIA. These could include documents relating to CPU load analysis, static analysis, etc. The idea here is that when some of these documents are added to the safety process deliverables, the chances of them going through higher scrutiny increases, and hence the OEM might push for such an approach.

In such a case — as a Tier-1 — it becomes essential that we sign up carefully only for the most relevant and safety-related documents as part of the DIA. It should not end up being a wishlist of sorts where all project documents are curated and tracked through the DIA.


The third critical aspect of a DIA is the aspect of milestones. The OEM and Tier-1 might agree on when a certain work product needs to be available. Sometimes, there could even be intermediate milestones at which documents need to be submitted.

Let us consider two examples.

In the first example of a FMEDA, the OEM might be interested (or concerned) to know whether we are able to meet the HW metrics or not. As meeting the HW metrics is an essential aspect of demonstrating safety, OEMs might push to have these results available early in the development cycle (say, during B-Sample or, in the worst case, before the DV build). At this point, the SW development might not be complete, and hence the HW metric achieved might come with the caveat that these metrics assume the SW safety mechanisms identified will be implemented in the coming milestones.

As generally happens in any project, some of the assumptions might go for a toss (due to various valid or invalid reasons). Due to this, the OEM might be interested in viewing the FMEDA results/report a second time after the SW development milestones are completed.

The second example concerns SW test results (say, unit testing results). These results would be available only after SW development is completed, and the OEM might want to just look at the coverage report (Statement, Branch, and MC/DC). For this summary report, the OEM might agree to view it after the SW development milestone is completed and not push for an early milestone. This gives the Tier-1 some breathing space (and this breathing space is something we have never seen!).


Even as we have taken to heart what Frederick the Great is rumoured to have said — “My people and I have come to an agreement which satisfies us both. They are to say what they please, and I am to do what I please.” — DIAs are an essential part of safety development, and utmost attention is to be paid to satisfying what has been agreed.

Comments