Embedded development is a rare case where a low-quality contractor can ruin not just the interface, but the entire product. An error in the microcontroller’s code can halt production, cause a device recall, or even harm the user. Here’s how a CTO can distinguish a mature embedded team from one that’s just "learning as they go."

Subject expertise: not just code, but understanding the context

Choosing an embedded software company means choosing a partner who will literally control how your hardware functions. A good contractor is not limited to the task of "making it work." They understand exactly how the product will be used: under what conditions, under which regulations, and for what business purposes. This is the fundamental difference between "writing code" and "building a reliable product component."

Let’s say you’re developing a smart speaker. A weak contractor will focus on connecting Wi-Fi modules and an audio processor — and miss the fact that the device should wake up in 200 ms and run on battery power. A strong firmware development company will clarify the usage scenarios, understand how the user interacts with the device, and propose an architecture in which it doesn’t drain overnight or lag on startup.

It’s easy to check: ask the contractor questions about your industry. Let them explain what limitations they’ve encountered in similar projects, how they solved certification challenges, and what would be considered in the architecture based on industry specifics. If the response is vague and filled with generalities about "experience with hardware," you’re likely facing a trial-and-error approach — at your expense.

The ability to work with hardware

Embedded development begins where the programmer’s usual tools end. Here, the code interacts directly with hardware: power lines, digital buses, pins, and timers. The team should be able to read electrical schematics, understand PCB layouts, and diagnose hardware issues using an oscilloscope, logic analyzer, or at least UART logs.

A lack of these skills can easily lead to critical issues. A simple example: in one project, the contractor failed to notice that the I2C bus lacked pull-up resistors. The result was an unstable connection between the microcontroller and the sensor, random failures, a hard-to-reproduce bug, and weeks spent locating it. An experienced team would have found the issue in half an hour — and most likely would have prevented it during the schematic review stage.

At the same time, mature contractors go further — they participate in board bring-up, request schematics, specify supply voltages, and work closely with hardware engineers. This ensures synchronized development and minimizes integration risks.

Architectural approach: not an MVP, but a system built to last

A mediocre contractor will assemble working firmware that performs the basic tasks — but any future refinement will become a minefield. From day one, a strong partner designs the code as a system: modular, documented, with clear responsibility separation and scalability in mind.

This isn’t abstract engineering luxury. It’s essential if the product is expected to live beyond a single release — if you plan updates, new device versions, or an entire product line built on a shared platform.

Experience working under constraints

Embedded systems don’t have spare power or memory “for later.” It’s crucial to design code that works reliably under conditions where there is only 64 KB of RAM, an unstable power supply, and battery life is expected from a single cell.

A good contractor knows how to get the most out of limited resources. They won’t use a “convenient but heavy” library if the functionality can be implemented more efficiently. They can put peripherals to sleep, minimize interrupts, and reduce background power consumption.

Weaker teams, on the other hand, write code the way they’re used to: often copying from forums, ignoring firmware size, and failing to test power usage. Problems are discovered in production — the device drains the battery in a day or overheats under load.

To tell the difference, ask for examples of real projects with constraints. Let them explain how they achieved lower consumption, how they identified bottlenecks, and what they optimized. Their answer will quickly reveal the depth of their competence.

Consistency in testing and quality control

In embedded projects, errors can be tricky: a bug might appear only on a certain board revision, when the device heats up, or when the power supply is unstable. Therefore, without a well-thought-out approach to testing, there’s a high risk of recurring, subtle failures in production.

Strong teams organize verification on multiple levels — not just “test it,” but record and regularly reproduce the entire process. Here’s what that includes.

Find a tutor for this topic

Find a tutor

Unit tests for critical components
Even if the entire system isn’t covered by tests, a mature team writes unit tests for drivers, protocols, and control logic. This allows quick detection of regressions during the build phase.

Integration stands with live hardware
Development doesn’t end with the simulator. The team must have access to boards and test stands that allow them to monitor the device’s behavior under real conditions: check startup time, peripheral performance, and resilience to power failures.

Automation of build and verification
Strong teams implement CI/CD processes even in embedded development: firmware builds, test execution, coverage analysis, and static code checks — all of this should be part of the pipeline, not done manually.

Logging of manual checks
Even if some tests are performed manually, they’re not done “off the cuff.” A good contractor documents scenarios, logs results, and tracks issues and retests. This helps preserve knowledge and monitor quality over time.

Documented quality control policy
This doesn’t have to be a formal regulation. But there should be a clear internal structure: which tests are mandatory, who runs them and when, how bugs are documented, and how the release decision is made.

Ask the contractor to describe their quality control process. If you hear, “Yes, of course, we test,” ask for specifics. How? Where? What’s automated? Strong teams will immediately show you a pipeline, test plans, or at least examples of real quality control. Weaker ones will start talking about lack of time and “manual checks if needed.

Communication quality: contractor as an engineering partner


Communication is something even good technical teams often fall short on.

  • A strong contractor doesn’t just complete tasks but syncs with you as a partner.
  • A strong contractor documents solutions, maintains engineering documentation, and speaks openly about risks and limitations.
  • A strong contractor doesn’t wait for problems — they warn about them.


It’s a red flag if interaction boils down to receiving a technical specification and handing over a binary. It’s a good sign if the contractor participates in meetings, discusses trade-offs, suggests alternatives, and documents the API and architecture.

Ask them to show you a real example of the documentation they hand over to clients. If they can, it’s a sign of maturity. If they say that “everything is in the code,” you’re likely dealing with a typical executor team that’s not used to taking on engineering responsibility.

Transparency in estimates and planning


Embedded projects always involve uncertainty. Even an experienced contractor can’t guarantee an exact launch date, but they can explain where the estimate comes from, what stages the project includes, and where the risks lie.

Strong teams break the project into phases: research, prototyping, integration, debugging, and production readiness. They explain which components may be unstable, where delays are possible, and what timeframes are being set. This approach doesn’t eliminate surprises, but it makes them manageable.

Weak teams often promise too much — or, conversely, play it safe and add huge buffers. The result is either delays or an unreasonably high budget.

Ask to see the timeline of one of their previous projects. Compare what was planned with what actually happened. That will show you whether the contractor knows how to manage risks — or just shifts them onto the client.

Summary and checklist for CTO


Choosing an embedded contractor is not just a matter of budget and timing. It is a strategic decision that directly affects the reliability, scalability, and business sustainability of your product. Mistakes are costly here: they cannot be "quickly fixed" like a UI bug. They can cost you a batch of devices, brand reputation, and missed launch deadlines.

To prevent this, before signing a contract, make sure the contractor:

  • Understands the specifics of your industry and can offer engineering solutions in context.
  • Knows how to work with hardware, understands circuit design, and participates in board bring-up.
  • Builds architecture with scalability and updates in mind, rather than going “head-on”.
  • Has experience optimizing for limited resources and can clearly explain how they’ve done it.
  • Uses a systematic approach to testing instead of relying on manual verification.
  • Communicates transparently, documents decisions, and warns about risks.
  • Provides honest and reasonable planning for deadlines and resources, breaks the project into phases, and identifies risks.


If the contractor meets these criteria, you have most likely found not just a vendor, but a true technology partner.