When the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) introduced its graduate program featuring rotations in areas like data analytics, it signalled a commitment to evolving its internal capabilities. Recognising that financial misconduct often manifests through complex data patterns, ASIC aimed to equip its teams with the skills necessary to detect and address such issues effectively.
Across Australia, New Zealand, and the UK, regulators are realising that tomorrow’s challenges require capabilities they can’t always contract out. Emerging issues like climate-related risk, AI adoption, cybersecurity, and behavioural compliance are reshaping the skills regulators need, prompting a renewed focus on developing in-house talent pipelines.
This shift is not just about recruitment: it’s about long-term capability.
Why capability matters now
In a regulatory context, capability goes well beyond individual skills. It encompasses organisational knowledge, systems, leadership, culture, and the ability to adapt to change.
The Australian Public Service Commission (APSC), through its Capability Reinvestment Fund, supports activities that build this kind of institutional strength across agencies, from improving data literacy to advancing understanding of AI and workforce readiness for the green economy.
For regulators, capability is not just about responding to today’s demands, but about preparing for tomorrow’s.
Governments are increasingly looking to regulators to tackle complex, cross-cutting problems – from AI oversight to housing quality – and that requires internal capacity to anticipate, interpret and act. As the demands of regulation grow, the capability to deliver becomes a strategic differentiator.
From technical specialists to hybrid skill sets
The archetype of the career regulator is changing. Agencies once dominated by legal and compliance backgrounds are now seeking staff with hybrid skill sets. Data scientists are working alongside policy analysts; behavioural economists are sitting in on enforcement briefings.
In New Zealand, the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) takes a regulatory stewardship approach to managing its systems – one that emphasises long-term sustainability, proactive oversight, and collaborative practice. Its Regulatory Systems Stewardship Strategy 2023–2028 outlines the need to “build knowledge to manage regulatory systems,” anticipate broader system-wide impacts, and support regulatory decisions that are both evidence-based and people-centred.
Similarly, the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has integrated behavioural economics into its regulatory framework. In its 2013 Occasional Paper No. 1, the FCA outlined how understanding consumer behaviour – such as tendencies toward inertia, framing effects, and limited attention – can inform more effective regulation. By applying these insights, the FCA aims to design interventions that better protect consumers and promote fairer financial markets.
Building internal pipelines
Rather than relying solely on consultants or inter-agency secondments, some regulators are building their own pathways to develop talent.
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) offers a 15-month graduate program with rotations across teams such as frontline supervision, risk, policy and advice, and data analytics, designed to attract university graduates with diverse backgrounds, including those with quantitative skills. Similarly, ASIC’s aforementioned graduate program features rotations in various business areas, including data analytics, to develop well-rounded regulatory professionals.
In New Zealand, the Commerce Commission emphasizes the importance of building regulatory capability through strategic workforce development. Its Statement of Intent 2023–2027 outlines objectives to enhance internal expertise and foster a culture that supports continuous learning and adaptability, aiming to meet evolving regulatory challenges effectively.
These programs are part of a broader trend toward workforce development as a core strategic function. The Australian Public Service’s APS Academy initiative provides cross-agency learning and upskilling, and several regulators are tailoring its offerings to their sector-specific needs.
The role of leadership and culture
Building capability isn’t just about training programs. Leadership plays a decisive role in whether new skills are supported, applied, and scaled.
APRA’s 2023 Capability Review, conducted by the Financial Regulator Assessment Authority, emphasised the need for stronger cross-agency collaboration, greater knowledge sharing, and increased staff mobility to meet evolving regulatory demands. While it found APRA had strong technical capability, it recommended the agency further invest in data and technology skills and break down organisational silos to support more integrated supervision.
That kind of cultural shift requires more than a well-written strategy. It depends on leaders who reward curiosity, accept failure as part of innovation, and understand that building capability often means slowing down in the short term to speed up over time.
What next-generation capability looks like
Next-generation capability won’t look the same for every regulator.
For some, it means using AI to triage complaints more effectively. For others, it means deploying field inspectors equipped with mobile tech that enables real-time decision-making. For all, it means aligning internal skill sets with the growing complexity of their external mandates.
It also means being able to ask better questions. A team with in-house data science capability isn’t just better at crunching numbers. It’s better at knowing which numbers matter and how they intersect with risk, equity, and public trust.
The regulatory missions of the future – agile, data-driven, and deeply public-facing – will depend not just on rules, but on people. Investing in capability is no longer a side project or HR function. It may well be one of the most important long-term strategic decisions a regulator can make.
