Government and Regulators.
Specialist support for accountable authorities, regulators, oversight bodies and central agencies operating under sustained scrutiny and accelerating change.
Sharper, faster and more accountable, often at the same time.
Regulators and central agencies are navigating a period of sustained scrutiny and accelerating change. Royal commissions, parliamentary inquiries, coronial findings and Australian National Audit Office reviews are producing detailed expectations about how regulatory work is done, how evidence is used, and how human decisions inside the regulator are made and defended.
At the same time, regulated populations are themselves operating under cost, workforce and technology pressure, which is changing the nature of the risk being regulated. Regulators are being asked to be sharper, faster and more accountable, often at the same time. Artificial intelligence is entering the regulator’s own decision pipeline, which introduces a new class of human factors question that the sector has not fully answered.
What TriAxis Global does for regulators and government.
TriAxis Global supports regulators and government agencies to make human performance and human factors a formal, defensible part of how they work. We do this for the regulator’s own workforce and decision-making, and for the regulated industries they oversee. We hold regulator-side experience at senior level, which means the advice reflects how a regulator actually functions, not how an outsider imagines it functions.
The firm’s flagship offer for this sector is Human Factors and AI for Regulators, which addresses how regulators use, audit and defend decisions that are increasingly shaped by automated systems. It sits alongside established work in regulatory assurance, human factors embedded in regulatory decision-making, and capability uplift for regulatory and intelligence functions.
Four capability areas.
Human factors and artificial intelligence in regulatory decision-making
Supporting regulators to understand, govern and defend decisions where human judgment and automated systems are combined, including how to keep human accountability load-bearing.
Regulator and intelligence function uplift
Uplifting the regulator’s internal data, safety intelligence and risk triage capability, drawing on senior experience inside that function at a national regulator.
Assurance review of regulatory programmes
Independent review of the design and operation of specific regulatory programmes, examining the regulator’s own systems of work, its evidence base and the plausibility of its intended effect on the regulated population.
Human factors policy and guidance for regulated sectors
Development of regulatory guidance and policy instruments where the subject matter turns on fatigue, human performance, investigation learning or the operational realities of the regulated workforce.
Engagements led by Directors.
Engagements with regulators and government are led by Earl Brown, Managing Director, whose thirteen years at the Civil Aviation Safety Authority included the Chief Data Officer role and national leadership of safety risk and intelligence. Ash McAlpine, Director of Aviation Safety and Regulatory Affairs, is Australia’s State Representative to the International Civil Aviation Organization on wildlife hazard management and a former State Safety Programme Implementation Assessment Evaluator. Ben Cook, Director of Human Performance and Safety, held the Manager of Human Factors role at the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and led the build of a Defence Directorate of Human Performance and Safety. Eugene Dubossarsky supports the firm’s work on artificial intelligence in regulatory decision-making.
Diagnostic, programme or review.
Engagements typically begin with a short executive diagnostic, scoped tightly around the question the regulator or agency is actually being asked to answer. Where the work then moves to programme delivery, it is structured in defined phases with named accountability inside the firm, and with clear hand-back of capability at the end so the regulator is not left dependent on the adviser. Where the work is an independent assurance review, it is scoped to produce findings that can be tabled in internal governance and defended externally.
We do not accept engagements that would cross the regulator’s independence. Where our Directors hold serving roles inside a Commonwealth agency, we declare that relationship openly and decline work that could create an appearance of conflict.
Discuss your regulator or agency context with us.
A short conversation will quickly establish whether your question sits inside our depth. There is no charge for the first conversation.
Contact the leadership team