U.S. Supplier Standards for AV Safety Tech
Methodology
Type of Study
Methodology
Sample Size
Location
Industry
Segment
Sub-Segment
Target Audience
the challenge
An AV ecosystem client needed clarity on how safety and compliance expectations were influencing supplier selection for autonomy stacks (sensors, compute, software) across U.S. OEMs and Tier-1s. Procurement and engineering teams were not aligned on which “proof points” mattered most (e.g., functional safety, cybersecurity, validation evidence), creating inconsistent shortlisting, longer RFP cycles, and higher risk of selecting partners that could stall regulatory readiness. The client required decision-grade evidence that supported decision-making on messaging, partner strategy, and where to invest in compliance documentation to win programs.
Our Approach
InnResearch designed a targeted quantitative B2B study to quantify how safety/compliance criteria translate into procurement gates and supplier scorecards across AV buying committees. We structured the survey to isolate trade-offs (performance vs. compliance maturity vs. total cost) and identify which credentials most reliably move a vendor from “considered” to “selected.” The work delivered actionable insights that enabled stakeholders to prioritize the right evidence packages, align sales/engineering narratives, and reduce friction in go-to-market conversations.
Key Insights
Compliance maturity was a primary shortlisting gate: ~68% of buyers said documented safety/compliance readiness (functional safety process, validation traceability, and auditability) outweighed raw performance claims when narrowing vendors. Proof beats promises in final selection: ~61% required scenario-based validation evidence (simulation + track/on-road documentation) as a “must-have” to award business, even when total cost was higher. Cybersecurity documentation increasingly bundled with safety: ~58% treated cybersecurity governance (e.g., secure OTA and vulnerability response) as a safety-critical criterion that could disqualify otherwise strong technical bidders. Buying committees were misaligned internally: ~54% reported frequent gaps between procurement scorecards and engineering risk criteria—driving longer RFP cycles and late-stage vendor churn.
Impact
The study helped brands (and their commercial teams) reposition compliance documentation and validation transparency as measurable advantages, not overhead. The client used the findings to redesign supplier enablement materials (evidence checklist, audit-ready artifacts, and proof-point mapping to procurement stages), which enabled stakeholders to shorten qualification cycles, improve win-rate in targeted OEM/Tier-1 accounts, and reduce late-stage disqualification risk by aligning engineering and sourcing expectations.
Conclusion
By quantifying how U.S. AV buyers translate safety and regulatory readiness into procurement decisions, InnResearch delivered actionable insights that supported decision-making on partner strategy, product positioning, and investment priorities. The result was a clear playbook for what evidence wins, where committees disagree, and how suppliers can reduce friction from shortlist to award—while meeting the safety and compliance standards that buyers increasingly treat as non-negotiable.