Over the course of this series, we have made the case that legal regulators need a structured, annual risk outlook. So why don’t more of them produce one?
The answer is not that regulators disagree with the concept. It is that several practical barriers stand in the way.
The Barriers
- Limited research capacity. Many legal regulators – particularly smaller bar associations, specialist supervisory authorities, and regulators in capacity-constrained jurisdictions – simply do not have dedicated policy research teams. Their staff are focused on the day-to-day work of supervision, enforcement, and administration. Asking them to also conduct a systematic scan of the external environment is asking them to do something their structure was not designed for.
- The inward-looking default. Regulators naturally focus on what they control: rules, inspections, complaints, sanctions. The external environment – economic conditions, geopolitical events, technology trends, legislative reform elsewhere – often falls outside their usual field of vision, even when it materially affects the risks their regulated community faces. This is not negligence; it is a structural feature of how most regulatory bodies are organised and resourced.
- Cross-jurisdictional blind spots. External risks increasingly cross borders. A regulatory reform in one jurisdiction, an enforcement action in another, a technology trend emerging in a third – each may have implications for regulated professionals elsewhere. But few regulators have the international networks or comparative perspective to identify and interpret these connections systematically. They see their own jurisdiction clearly. They see less of the wider picture.
- The translation problem. Even when regulators are aware of external developments, translating them into specific, actionable implications for the profession requires a particular combination of regulatory knowledge, sector expertise, and analytical judgment. Knowing that AI is transforming legal services is not the same as understanding what that means for the supervisory priorities of a specific regulator overseeing a specific profession. This translation work is where the real value of a risk outlook lies – and it is precisely the step that most regulators find hardest to do in-house.
These barriers are real. But the cost of not acting is rising. Regulators that lack a forward-looking risk capability are increasingly likely to find themselves responding to crises they could have anticipated, defending supervisory priorities they cannot evidence, and falling behind the expectations of their boards, their profession, and their oversight arrangements.
It Can Be Done – and It Works
The good news is that producing a risk outlook does not require a regulator to build an in-house research department. It can be commissioned externally, tailored to the specific jurisdiction and profession, and delivered within a timeframe and budget that works for regulators of all sizes.
“Each year we ask Hook Tangaza to produce the annual risk outlook for the CLSB. This valuable work sets a baseline for the CLSB and the Costs Lawyer profession to build independent risk management profiles, in addition to identifying new and emerging opportunities. It offers reassurance on existing risks while introducing new ones, which in today’s world seem to change with increasing regularity”.
– Costs Lawyer Standards Board, England and Wales
Getting Started
So, what does commissioning a risk outlook actually involve?
No two regulators are the same, and the first step is understanding the regulatory model, the profession, the jurisdiction, and the external factors that matter most. This scoping work ensures that the resulting analysis is relevant and specific, not generic.
The core of the work is then a systematic scan of the external environment across political, economic, social, technological, legal and environmental categories. Each development is assessed against two questions: what has changed, and what might this mean for the profession? The analysis draws on authoritative sources and, where relevant, on cross-jurisdictional comparisons that place the regulator’s own situation in a wider context.
The analysis is produced as a structured document that can serve the regulator’s board, the profession, and external stakeholders, with an opportunity for the regulator to review and comment before finalisation. An optional board briefing can accompany the written product.
A typical engagement is completed within four to six weeks and is designed to be affordable and proportionate for regulators of all sizes, including those in capacity-constrained jurisdictions.
The Recurring Benefit
Once established, the risk outlook becomes a repeating annual product. Year on year, it builds a cumulative picture of the evolving risk landscape, allowing the regulator to track how risks develop over time and adjust supervisory priorities accordingly. It embeds forward-looking risk analysis into the regulator’s annual cycle – a cycle that, once established, becomes difficult to imagine operating without.
Exploring a Risk Outlook For Your Organisation
Hook Tangaza is a specialist research, advisory and consulting company working internationally across the legal sector. We have more than thirty years’ combined experience in working for bar associations, law societies, regulators and other agencies in the legal sector. We founded the International Conference of Legal Regulators, which since 2012 has brought together over 100 representatives of bars and lawyer regulatory bodies annually.
We have developed and deliver annual risk outlooks for legal sector regulators, and we welcome conversations with any regulatory body interested in exploring how this could work for their organisation and wider profession.
To discuss how a risk outlook could work for your organisation, get in touch at mail@hooktangaza.com.
