The Visibility Gap, Part 2
Before a public alert appears, organisations must detect, interpret, escalate and classify emerging product safety signals. This article examines how that journey works across the EU, Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Independent product-readiness intelligence
A quality system is not automatically a visibility system.
When an incident, claim or regulator arrives, compliance records are not enough. You have to reconstruct what you knew, what you decided, and why, in time to matter.
The gap between compliant and defensible.
Latest intelligence
Coming up
Readiness tracker
Tracker data is temporarily unavailable. Please check back shortly.
Dates are verified against primary sources. See the full tracker and our verification method.
The thesis
Most organisations can prove they are compliant. Far fewer can prove they are defensible.
Compliance shows that rules were followed. Defensibility shows what the organisation knew, what it decided, and why.
Editorial programmes
Signal Translation
Turning regulatory and product signals into something a board can act on.
Latest: Most companies have product data. Few have product intelligence. →
The Visibility Gap
The first four-part run of a wider investigation into how product-safety signals are detected, interpreted, escalated and made visible before harm occurs.
Forthcoming · publishing weekly from 10 August 2026
PLD by Market
Country readings of Directive (EU) 2024/2853, from readiness as a trust advantage to why proximity is not protection.
About
William Corkhill
Three decades of global and EMEA quality and product-integrity leadership across fire, life-safety, security and connected industrial products, where a failure is a safety event, not an inconvenience.
One evidence-led dispatch. No filler.
Follow The Readiness Directive on LinkedIn, where the newsletter is published.
Subscribe on LinkedIn