Collaborative regulation, based upon mutual respect between the regulator and members of the regulated industries, is less common than the other styles. 

There are examples in Australia of collaborative processes, such as the revision of the dispute resolution system in Western Australia and improvements in customer service in Queensland.  

Conscious collaboration is a little more common in some of the North American jurisdictions. 

For instance, in the State of New Mexico the issue of access to medical information about the claimant was a political and legislative...

The "lassiez-faire" style of regulation is based upon trust in the natural relationships of the stakeholders and service providers.

In a "laissez-faire" system, the mutual needs of the parties and market forces in the environment are presumed to balance one another in ways that yield a smoothly functioning system with minimal intervention.

One example of a "laissez-faire" administrative scheme is Tasmania. For the most part, the scheme gets along with minimal resources and staffing by virtue of reasonable trust in the power of the stakeholders and service providers to control...

The scenario is familiar. The regulator is dictating procedures, limitations or reporting requirements that are stifling innovation and your effectiveness. Worse, your industry is being blamed for lacklustre results, in an environment where good outcomes are next to impossible to achieve.

Alternatively, the regulator is treading water in an environment that demands action if fair access and opportunity are to be achieved.

You can try to live with it, and play along with a system that seems completely uninformed about the needs and demands of your role, or you can try to...