How satisfied are you with your organization’s pharma track and trace software? If contract renewal is coming up and your team is still dealing with slow support, limited visibility into EPCIS data, or reporting that feels overly complicated, a provider switch may be the most practical next step.
Pharmaceutical companies are now dealing with the realities of DSCSA readiness after major enforcement milestones across 2025 for manufacturers, repackagers, wholesale distributors, and many dispensers. Teams need systems that help them operate reliably across packaging lines, warehouses, and trading partner connections.
For companies thinking about switching from an existing provider (including platforms like TraceLink and similar vendors), the decision usually comes down to a few practical concerns:
This guide breaks down what to look for—and how to make the switch without turning implementation into a drawn-out project
If your team is evaluating pharma track and trace software, these considerations can help you compare providers:
Not every complaint means a platform is the wrong fit. But certain patterns tend to show up when systems can’t support a scaling serialization program.
Here are common red flags companies report when considering a provider change:
Covectra has previously discussed how inadequate vendor support can directly impact serialization program success—especially when time and coordination matter most.
Reading tip: Is Your Vendor’s Inadequate Support Hurting Your Serialization Project’s Success?
Customer service is one of the easiest areas to underestimate when selecting a provider. When serialization issues occur—whether on the packaging line or during EPCIS exchange—slow response times can delay shipments and add extra work for internal teams.
A stronger provider experience usually includes:
Support speed matters, but so does support quality. When issues involve line operations, EPCIS processing, or partner data exchange, generic ticket-handling slows everyone down.
Look for a team that understands:
Switching providers is easier when you know who owns the process. If your current provider routes every request through multiple layers, the same pattern may repeat during implementation.
Ask if the provider offers:
A provider should help teams reduce repeat problems by improving workflows and handling common failure points, such as:
Usability matters in pharma track and trace software because day-to-day tasks should be straightforward. Serial number work and data access need to be reliable for packaging, QA, and supply chain teams.
Serial number generation should support packaging teams without forcing constant manual steps or delays.
Practical usability signals include:
If serial number management feels like a “special project” every week, switching providers becomes a strategic imperative.
Data access is another major driver for switching. During audits, partner troubleshooting, or internal QA reviews, teams often need to find answers fast:
When a system makes data hard to locate—or requires multiple exports to reach basic answers—teams burn time and take on extra risk.
Look for a platform that helps teams access:
Implementation time may not be “plug and play.” But switching doesn’t need to stretch into an open-ended rollout either.
A realistic transition depends on scope, including:
The fastest implementations typically share a few traits:
When a provider has deep packaging-line experience, implementation becomes more predictable.
Covectra supported a mid-size contract manufacturer that needed serialization capability to meet DSCSA expectations for brand owner customers. Covectra’s packaging line experience helped guide implementation for a manual packaging line, along with a program plan for additional lines over the next 10 months.
The deployment included AuthentiTrack Cloud Level 5 database access for brand owners, and when brand owners already had Level 5 systems, Covectra supported data transfer through a gateway approach.
Licensing costs get attention during procurement. But the decision whether to move to a new provider is usually shaped by long-term cost patterns.
A helpful way to evaluate cost is to split it into categories:
Baseline subscription or licensing costs matter, but only as part of the full picture.
Ask:
Implementation time costs money through internal effort—even when the vendor fee looks reasonable.
Consider:
A common frustration is paying extra for normal operational needs.
Watch for contract terms that may add costs over time, such as:
This is one of the biggest hidden costs. When usability is poor, teams compensate through spreadsheets, offline tracking, or repeated manual checks.
A platform that reduces internal effort can lower long-term cost even if licensing is similar.
The best transitions start with a clear plan for timing, data continuity, and internal ownership across Supply Chain, QA, and IT. That work helps avoid downtime and keeps EPCIS visibility intact during rollout.
Here are steps to consider when changing providers
List the pain points you want resolved. Be specific.
Examples:
Define measurable outcomes.
Examples:
Confirm what must remain accessible:
Moving to a new provider is easier when the right teams are involved from the start:
Avoid switching during peak packaging demand if possible. A phased plan can help teams control risk.
Phased options may include:
If your organization is weighing a renewal against a provider change, focus questions on day-to-day requirements, support expectations, and long-term costs. These questions can help guide the conversation:
Here are questions that tend to get useful answers:
If a provider can’t give clear answers—or answers change depending on who you talk to—switching becomes easier to justify.
A provider change affects more than software access. The right platform can reduce rework in serial number workflows, improve EPCIS visibility, and make it easier for teams to resolve issues without slowing packaging or partner coordination.
Covectra’s AuthentiTrack platform is designed to support serialization programs with practical onboarding, accessible data, and a customer-first approach—especially for companies that need a provider that stays responsive after go-live.
Have questions? We can help you evaluate the transition plan, timeline, and cost expectations.
Contact us to discuss your current challenges and what switching to Covectra could look like.
Switching difficulty depends on integrations, packaging line setup, validation requirements, and partner connections. A clear rollout plan reduces disruption.
Implementation time varies by scope. Timelines depend on number of sites, lines, integrations, and how quickly teams align on validation and testing.
Many organizations keep access to legacy records while transitioning. A good switching plan includes data continuity planning, reporting requirements, and audit readiness.
Common drivers include support add-ons, fees for changes, trading partner onboarding effort, and internal time spent working around usability limits.
Teams often prioritize customer service, ease of use for serial number workflows, implementation time, and total cost of ownership over the full contract term.
Read More
Track and Trace Software for Pharma: Features, Requirements, and Compliance Readiness
Serialization in Pharma: Driving Compliance, Safety, and Traceability
What Is Pharmaceutical Serialization and Why Is It Critical Today