Verification & Validation ensures that the product has been built correctly, in accordance with its defined requirements and design intent. Verification focuses specifically on confirming that each engineering item, from product elements to interfaces, fulfills the technical expectations assigned to it. This means assessing whether the transformation from input to output has introduced any defects or deviations—and if not, providing formal proof that the item performs as required.
This is distinct from validation, which answers a different question: whether the product as a whole addresses stakeholder needs in its operational environment. Verification ensures that we built the product right. Validation later confirms that we built the right product.
Verification must be conducted across all levels of the product structure. In practice, most products contain multiple layers of composition built from lower-level product elements. Each of these layers must be verified in sequence. That means performing verification actions at the level of product elements, then again at each assembly level, continuing all the way up to the full product. This progressive verification ensures that issues are caught early and that higher-level testing is not invalidated by lower-level errors.
It is a common misconception that verification only occurs after integration and before final validation. In reality, verification should begin during development and continue through integration and deployment. Design reviews, model checks, code inspections, simulations, and lab tests are all part of early-stage verification and help avoid costly surprises downstream. As product maturity increases, verification methods become more physical and formalized—but they should never be delayed until the end.
Verification also provides the link between specification and execution. By aligning requirements with measurable, testable actions, and tracking them throughout the lifecycle, we ensure that what was promised is actually delivered—under the intended operational conditions.
Common Challenges
Verification often runs into trouble when it is treated as a late-stage checkbox activity. When verification actions are not coordinated with product integration steps, teams discover errors too late or find themselves repeating tests. In some cases, vague or poorly written requirements prevent meaningful verification altogether. Ambiguous language leads to uncertain criteria, which weakens both the evidence and the confidence in outcomes.
Using the wrong technique is another common mistake. Certain requirements are best verified by simulation or inspection, while others require formal testing under specific conditions. Applying an inappropriate method wastes time and may produce misleading results. Gaps in documentation are equally damaging. Without clear records, traceability between requirements and verification outcomes is lost. This not only complicates quality reviews, but also undermines change management and future audits.
Environmental variations can also distort results. What passes in a test environment may fail under actual use. Verification needs to account for these variables to ensure reliability holds outside the lab.
Our Approach
We treat verification as a structured, multi-level activity that supports every stage of development. We begin by creating a verification strategy tailored to the product's architecture and lifecycle phase. Each verification action is defined with precision: what is being verified, on what level, against which expected result, and using which technique. Actions may apply to system elements, interfaces, functions, properties, or even design procedures.
We draw from a full spectrum of techniques: inspections for conformity, analyses for completeness, demonstrations for usability, simulations for behavior, and formal tests for measured performance. Each is chosen based on the nature of the requirement and the maturity of the product.
Verification steps are coordinated with integration checkpoints to ensure that what is being assembled has already been proven. We verify design patterns and architectural characteristics just as rigorously as we verify outputs and interfaces.
All verification actions are documented in a Verification Requirements Traceability Matrix (RVTM), maintaining a link from requirement to action to result. This ensures continuity and clarity throughout the product lifecycle. Verification reports and records are maintained and updated regularly, so that nothing is lost when issues arise or adjustments are needed.
What to Expect
Clients can expect a comprehensive and methodical verification and validation setup, including:
A structured V&V Report capturing the full strategy, constraints, procedures, and outcomes
Verified components and system elements at each level of integration, ensuring readiness before moving forward
Tailored Verification and Validation Procedures that address the specific properties, constraints, and interfaces for each requirement
A complete set of Verification and Validation Records and Reports to meet contractual, quality, or regulatory needs (for more on this refer to our Compliance Oriented Services)
Advisory support in selecting the most appropriate verification techniques and tools for their product
An up-to-date RVTM showing how each verification action maps back to a specific requirement, ensuring traceability and completeness
Service Dependencies
This service requires a solid foundation of requirements and design documentation. Without these, verification cannot produce meaningful results. It also works in tandem with the Product Integration process, as integration steps trigger verification activities. Finally, verification plays a critical role in enabling validation and supporting stakeholder acceptance. It contributes to overall product assurance and risk management, helping confirm that the product meets expectations at every level before it is delivered or deployed.
