Serialisation legislation, particularly in its early iterations, tends to be somewhat vague, incomplete and sometimes contradictory. Interpreting the legislation and predicting its impacts can present significant challenges, requiring specific serialisation knowledge as well as new legislative relationships with local legislators.
This is further compounded when considering the timelines allowed in the legislation. History has shown that timelines are often vague and subject to change. However, when implementation dates are finally set, they often do not allow enough time for robust implementation.
Given the uncertainties in requirements and timing, organisations need to ensure there is a clear way of communicating their considered view of the legislative requirements at any particular moment. Failing to do this will potentially result in individual functions or groups creating their own interpretations, which at minimum is wasteful of resources, but at worst results in capabilities being implemented which do not meet the eventual requirements of the legislation.