SodiusWillert Blog

A Practical Guide for SysML v2 Adoption

Eran Gery — Fri, 03 Apr 2026 14:42:43 GMT

SysML v2 marks a significant evolution in MBSE, designed from the ground up with greater precision, rigor, and a strong focus on interoperability and ecosystem enablement. Rather than a simple update to SysML v1, it introduces a fundamentally different architecture and modeling approach, which creates challenges for organizations with existing SysML v1 investments.

This article explores practical adoption strategies, emphasizing incremental approaches and the coexistence of SysML v1 and SysML v2 rather than encouraging a wholesale migration.

Best practices for Managing Baselines with IBM Doors Next

csimon@sodiuswillert.com (Célina Simon) — Wed, 01 Apr 2026 16:35:58 GMT

👉 Managing Baselines with IBM Doors Next - What do you need to learn?

Define your baseline strategy →
Create a baseline →
Use baselines for impact analysis →
Avoid the most frequent baseline management issues →
Prepare for audits →

In IBM DOORS Next, baselines capture the approved state of requirements at specific lifecycle milestones. They intend to preserve the configuration that was reviewed, validated, or authorized before downstream work begins.

A strong baseline strategy, established right from the start, is a foundational governance decision that determines whether your projects can demonstrate compliance, manage change, and support certification activities with confidence.

In this article, we share concrete recommendations for creating and managing baselines effectively in IBM DOORS Next.

How to Connect Requirements, Changes & Tests Across Different Tool Vendors?

csimon@sodiuswillert.com (Célina Simon) — Mon, 09 Mar 2026 16:54:55 GMT

Engineering organizations don’t build their toolchains from scratch. They inherit tools from past programs, comply with customer-mandated platforms, or adopt domain-specific solutions that genuinely work better for some tasks. Over the years, this has created a heterogeneous environment. What may appear as an issue is simply the reality of long-term engineering programs.

So the question to be raised here is not whether you should have multiple vendors in your stack. Most of the time, you already do. It’s more about how to connect requirements, changes, design, and tests across different proprietary tools without disrupting what already works.

However, achieving this requires a shift in perspective. Instead of seeking uniformity, for instance, through consolidation into a single suite, organizations should focus on connecting engineering artifacts across different tools. The presence of multiple tools in your environment is the natural consequence of real operational, technical, and organizational constraints. So, we don’t want to eliminate heterogeneity. The real challenge lies in making diversity strong over time.

Why Interoperability Is More Than a Tooling Problem?

csimon@sodiuswillert.com (Célina Simon) — Tue, 03 Mar 2026 09:03:32 GMT

Conversation with our experts #3

Today, many engineering organizations heavily invest in modern toolchains. Yet they still experienced challenges with fragmented data, duplicated artifacts, and late discoveries of inconsistencies, including traceability gaps.

The reality is that interoperability is often seen as a tooling challenge. But what if the real bottleneck was not the technology itself? What if it lies in how engineering work is structured across domains, how data ownership is defined, and how configuration flows, or fails to flow, throughout the lifecycle?

As systems grow more complex and regulatory pressures increase, it’s becoming clear that interoperability cannot be seen as just a tool integration effort.

To explore this shift in perspective, we spoke with Thomas Capelle, President of SodiusWillert. In this conversation, he explains why silos persist despite significant investments in tools and processes, how fragmented engineering information flow affects quality and compliance, and why interoperability must be addressed at the organizational level before even becoming a tooling discussion

This third episode of the "Conversations with our experts” series invites our readers to reconsider interoperability as a structural and strategic challenge.

ASPICE Traceability: What Evidence Assessors Typically Review?

csimon@sodiuswillert.com (Célina Simon) — Wed, 28 Jan 2026 13:45:09 GMT

In a previous article, we outlined the main principles of Automotive SPICE, also known as ASPICE. Above all, we explained why traceability is such a central aspect of this framework and how assessors use it to evaluate whether engineering processes are consistently applied and outcomes are verifiable over time. If you haven’t read it yet, or would like a refresher, you can access it via the link above.

This new article, also dedicated to ASPICE, moves from principles to practice. We explain where ASPICE explicitly expects traceability across the development lifecycle, from requirements to verification and support processes, and what concrete evidence assessors typically review. We also highlight common traceability gaps that can be observed during assessments and how engineering teams can avoid them. And we conclude by outlining a few practical recommendations on how to establish traceability as a continuous part of engineering activities, not just an assessment requirement.

Why Traceability is Central to ASPICE Assessments?

csimon@sodiuswillert.com (Célina Simon) — Mon, 19 Jan 2026 09:34:10 GMT

Derived from the ISO/IEC 15504 SPICE framework, Automotive SPICE, known as ASPICE, provides a structured process assessment framework to assess how well engineering and management processes are defined, executed, and controlled across the automotive supply chain.

How to Establish a Digital Thread for Multidisciplinary Engineering?

Eran Gery — Wed, 14 Jan 2026 16:03:03 GMT

Multidisciplinary teams frequently operate with disconnected tools and fragmented engineering data, making necessary practices such as end-to-end traceability, cross-disciplinary collaboration, collaborative reviews, and progress tracking error-prone and costly. Engineering data is created and managed across a wide range of domains, but is rarely connected coherently and consistently.

By establishing a Digital Thread, organizations can overcome these challenges, creating continuous digital connectivity across tools, data, and processes. A Digital Thread allows streamlined traceability, unified process tracking, and effective cross-disciplinary reviews throughout the lifecycle. In this article, I explain how a Digital Thread architecture addresses these issues and illustrate how our solution,

SECollab, provides a centralized integration platform to aggregate heterogeneous data, manage trace links, and orchestrate reviews, thereby ensuring end-to-end traceability, governance, and compliance across multidisciplinary engineering environments.

Reasserting the Role of Requirements Engineering in Advanced Systems Engineering

csimon@sodiuswillert.com (Célina Simon) — Thu, 18 Dec 2025 16:09:02 GMT

Conversation with our experts #2

Requirements Engineering and Systems Engineering have always been closely interlinked throughout the engineering lifecycle. It’s also well established that effective requirements management is a prerequisite for success. Yet, for decades, teams have often struggled with inadequate tools and inefficient handovers, resulting in neglected requirements and serious issues only discovered during testing phases.

SodiusWillert Roundup: A Look Back at 2025

csimon@sodiuswillert.com (Célina Simon) — Thu, 18 Dec 2025 10:41:14 GMT

Today’s systems are more interconnected and complex than ever. It's astounding to see how things have changed in just a few years, and there's no end in sight. Engineers now heavily depend on accurate data and reliable traceability to maintain projects on track. At SodiusWillert, one of our core missions is to help them face this new and evolving reality with tools that integrate better, automate more, and remove unnecessary friction from daily workflows. Throughout 2025, we expanded our product portfolio, strengthened our interoperability capabilities, and introduced new approaches to support engineers where it matters most.

Choosing a Systems Modeling Tool for Successful MBSE Deployment: don’t Overlook Interoperability and AI Integration

Eran Gery — Mon, 15 Dec 2025 10:32:17 GMT

Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) is the cornerstone of a fully digital engineering ecosystem. Organizations such as INCOSE and the Department of Defense (DoD) champion this approach in their digital engineering strategies, and MBSE is transforming how complex systems are designed, analyzed, and managed. However, as organizations embark on their MBSE journey, one aspect often determines the success of their initiative: the choice of the right systems modeling tool. Indeed, the true value of modeling tools resides in their ability to drive a paradigm shift in systems development. So, to help you make the best decision for your projects, we've written an article that addresses the key features and capabilities you need to look for in a systems modeling tool.