Differing interpretation of Standards

Is a manufacturer's interpretation of the performance standards and / or the type approval method adequate to ensure simple navigational tasks are user friendly at the same time as allowing for improvement in ECDIS functionality?

As a provider of ECDIS training (both 40hr generic and type-specific) we are aware of quite differing standards of functionality and subsequent use of.  We know of at least one manufacturer that has an ‘IMO mode’ and an additional ‘Manufacturer’s mode’ on one of their ECDIS variants but most appear not to have this option even though their functionality is quite different in some aspects.  However, the tools required for pilotage planning and monitoring are the most varied and students are implying that it is often more difficult or time consuming than on a paper chart to create adequate clearing bearings or accurately establish an area of safe water in between safety contours.  This is creating a tendency of not ‘bothering’.

Is a manufacturer’s interpretation of the performance standards and / or the type approval method adequate to ensure simple navigational tasks are user friendly at the same time as allowing for improvement in ECDIS functionality?