They partnered with VirtusLab to modernize and enhance the performance of its car configurator engine. Together, they drastically improved the technical excellence of the implemented solution by addressing key non-functional requirements.
The Challenge
The automotive giant’s mission to provide highly individualized vehicle configurations for its customers presented several key challenges.
- Buildability Consistency: With a wide range of vehicle options available to customers, from engine types to add-ons, ensuring that selected configurations were technically feasible and producible became increasingly difficult.
- Scalability: The legacy system struggled to support the company’s growing need to process configuration data for multiple brands and markets simultaneously. They needed a solution to unify this data across 40 system interfaces and ensure consistent production planning.
- Error-Prone Manual Processes: Manual checks for production consistency led to errors and lacked a streamlined way to verify that customer-selected configurations matched production capabilities.
- Cost and Maintenance: The old system was not only slow and prone to errors but was also becoming increasingly expensive to maintain, year after year.
The automotive group needed a solution that could process vast amounts of configuration data, ensure scalability, and integrate seamlessly into critical business functions such as order management and production planning. They built an initial solution using an agile, “move fast and break things” approach, achieving widespread success across multiple departments.
However, maintaining technical excellence became increasingly challenging as new features expanded rapidly and business requirements evolved. This resulted in several issues:
- Manual, Error-Prone Client Integration: Client onboarding was lengthy and unreliable, requiring a new software version deployment for each change.
- Performance Inconsistencies: The solution showed instability under different workflows and load conditions.
- Technical Debt: Key system elements lacked robustness and required improvements and refactoring.
- Binary client-server communication.
- UI out of sync with corporation standards
- A deployment process causing downtime.
- An inefficient code architecture.
- Minimal, often obsolete documentation for external interfaces, lacking automated updates.