# How should buyers sequence implementation without creating another transformation programme?

**Our recommendation is to close immediate obligation and evidence gaps first, then implement reusable platform capabilities.** Do not make a new platform’s go-live date the prerequisite for meeting a nearer obligation.

### Immediate triage

- Assign legal, compliance and operational owners to the near-term dates above.
- Identify which dates in the existing register are obsolete, proposed or suspended.
- Obtain an approved applicability decision for each priority item.
- Record a controlled interim process where a platform change cannot be delivered in time.
- Preserve the evidence supporting current decisions before migration.

### Before year-end

- Prepare January 2027 privacy and automated-decision workflows where applicable.
- Establish evidence collection for applicable audit periods starting in January.
- Update internal audit templates for effective topical requirements.
- Test at least one complete workflow, including an exception, failed integration and export.
- Confirm who will maintain regulatory mappings after implementation partners leave.

### During the next procurement or renewal decision

Use the **Requirements Scorecard** to select the first workflow, the **Migration Checklist** to protect history, and the **Demo Script** to make supplier claims testable. The three-year TCO comparison should separately request prices for regulatory content, specialist modules, APIs, sandboxes, implementation, administrator training and update services.

Ask explicitly:

- Who decides whether a regulatory update applies: the buyer, supplier or content provider?
- What is included when a rule is delayed, replaced or withdrawn?
- Can the buyer reject an automated mapping while preserving the proposed mapping and rationale?
- What requires paid professional services?
- Can historical content still be exported after a content subscription ends?
- Who owns ongoing data quality, integrations and testing?

**The purchase decision should follow an evidenced operating model.** If the incumbent can support the required controls and change process with manageable repair work, regulation alone is not a sufficient reason to replace it.