Bringing regulators together to strengthen risk-based regulation practice

Political polarisation and rapidly advancing technology are adding to the challenges regulators have always faced in using their resources effectively. 

Risk-based practice is now central to effective regulation, enforcement and compliance management and the focus of ANZSOG’s The Modern Regulator (TMR) program. 

Program lead, Harvard University’s Professor Malcolm Sparrow shared why it’s important for regulators to get a practical introduction to various forms of risk-based regulation and how they apply across a range of public sector contexts. 

“Regulation is a real art, and a formidable challenge. Regulators, with limited resources, have to decide which rules to enforce and why and where; what to do about risks for which you have no rules; what range of tools and skills to develop and deploy; how to organise themselves; how to prioritise one issue over another; and how to respond to so many different competing stakeholder groups out there pulling them in different directions. 

“Unlike the service delivery side of government, you’re often dealing with people who don’t necessarily want to see you, and some of whom would prefer that you didn't exist at all. There’s stress in this business that generally does not apply to the service side of government,” said Professor Sparrow. 

Making a successful shift to risk-based regulation 

Increasing numbers of regulators are adopting, or trying to adopt, risk-based or problem-based approaches to regulation – an important trend but one that is difficult to see through to maturity. 

“We have always known the value of functional specialisation, and hence the value of functional units.  We have more recently learned the importance of organising around core high-volume processes, so we can optimise and manage them effectively,” Professor Sparrow said. 

“Now the new kid on the block is the problem-based or risk-based approach, where you organise, not around a particular program or function, but around a specific, clearly defined risk. Such an approach is relevant whenever a risk - which is important to the public - is not adequately addressed through routine or standard treatments. 

“The managerial structures to support functions and processes are very well known and understood, but the equivalent managerial structures and protocols for problem-based work simply aren’t there - unless you invent them.  It's not hard to invent them, but the absence of formal structures to support this kind of work remains one of the principal impediments.”  

The TMR program also considers special categories of risk including: invisible risks, where the true scale of the problem is unknown; risks involving adversaries (or ‘conscious opponents’) such as organised crime, cyber fraud, smuggling, or tax evasion; and risks characterised as catastrophic, with low probability but enormous consequence, such as nuclear or aviation safety. 

The Modern Regulator and risk-based regulation  

Who is in the room  

The TMR brings together newcomers to regulatory practice at any rank—from the front line to the Boardroom—who would value a chance to think through the range of choices available to them.  

It is also suitable for experienced regulators who want a fresh look at opportunities for development or reform and participants from the not-for-profit sector who have risk-control or harm-reduction at the core of their organisational missions. 

Professor Sparrow says that what is special about TMR for participants is its: “absolute focus on the practical dilemmas facing professional regulators” and the way it brings regulators from different fields together 

“We focus on the half of government that is primarily delivering protections to society, rather than services: identifying threats, risks and harms, and using the power of the state where necessary to oblige people to put the public interest ahead of their private or economic interests. 

“We bring this group of public servants together so that they have the chance to share their experience across different domains, and they can see that somebody's actually paying attention to the importance of their role and the complexity of the decisions they face,” Professor Sparrow said.  

Determining the meaning(s) of risk-based regulation 

Risk-based regulation means a lot of different things to different people, and the TMR program, quite deliberately, looks at a range of meanings. 

“Distinguishing the different meanings is useful because a lack of clarity is one major obstacle for any kind of progress or development. Clarity of language and agreed vocabulary really helps speed up the discussions in-house about where you want to go and why. It prevents folks wasting time by talking at cross purposes,” Professor Sparrow said. 

Examining the options for change 

Professor Sparrow said that the program provided a range of ideas for regulators, as well as the chance to compare notes with peers in other jurisdictions or regulatory domains. 

“We deliberately give them a menu of concepts – five or six will be covered in this seminar.  That way each participant will nearly always find something they can take away with direct relevance for their own operations and which directly resonates with their contemporary challenges.”  

Tackling modern challenges 

He said that the role of the professional regulator has always been way more complicated than people were prepared to acknowledge, but regulatory life was particularly thorny at the moment. 

“Increasing political polarisation means that the groups out there pulling on regulators—either to do a better job of protection or to decrease the impact of regulation on business—become more vocal and extreme, with the regulators caught in the middle trying to do better on both fronts simultaneously,” he said. 

“We've got technological development proceeding at a pace that is perhaps unprecedented, and I assume that's going to continue. That presents regulators with the challenge of figuring out if and how they should respond, and just how fast they should move. 

“Move too quickly with an emerging field like biomedical engineering or nanotechnology or AI, and there’s a danger you’ll get it all wrong, and then find it’s difficult and time consuming to undo what you did in haste.  Go too slowly, on the other hand, and you'll look paralysed and feckless. Getting the pace about right and maintaining flexibility for new developments is a particular and contemporary challenge.”  

He said that sharing such challenges with other regulators was always valuable for participants trying to make changes in their own agencies. 

“There are clear, broad, shared truths, which are really valuable for participants to nail down,” he said. 

“They might think they have to invent everything for themselves, but they don't. There's a lot of people thinking with them, and a lot of potential partners as they move forward.” 

ANZSOG’s The Modern Regulator at a glance 

Registrations are now open.  

Experience: Professor Sparrow guides participants through recent developments in regulatory practice, helping them to better understand different classes of risk and how these can be addressed through different regulatory structures, strategies and tactics. 

The program combines expert input with practical examples and interactive discussion, enabling participants to reflect on emerging trends across the regulatory landscape and identify opportunities to refine their own agency’s approach. 

Delivery: Digital learning experience in 2x3.5-hour sessions 

2026 courses: 29 to 30 July 2026