Having left the NS 3 yrs ago my knowledge of SOPs and briefs is a little out of date.
However, in my time briefs would be said parrot fashion as it was generally obvious what type of approach was being done and how it would be flown.
I believe that briefs should reflect the conditions that are being flown in. If it is good VMC and the deck approach is simple the perhaps a call "standard brief - if we go around it will be to the L or R"
Should the conditions be marginal - as it seems to have been at Sumburgh then a very detailed brief should be given encompassing everything that needs to be done/monitored during the approach so a successful landing can be made.
I can see one problem that may happen is that companies want to standardise checklists/SOPs across the whole of their global operations. This may produce checklists/SOPs which are too broad and fail to take account of individual operational limits.
Have the autopilots become too complicated and not fully understood by crews who have had little training in all the quirks and dangers of the system. It seems that the 332L2 autopilot does have "gotchas" which EC obviously recognised and HC praises the 225 as being very capable and safe to use.
HF