Issue 14 — Spring 2025
Journalists and Contributors
Damian Ali
Oluwatoyin Aguda
Dean Benard
Collette Deschenes
M. Daniel Roukema
Graphic Designer & Production Manager
Allison Wedler
Editor in Chief
M. Daniel Roukema
Photo credits
Adobe Stock
DA Photography
Dean Benard
MDR Strategy Group Ltd.
The Registrar magazine is produced and published by MDR Strategy Group Ltd.
115-200 Waterfront Drive
Bedford, Nova Scotia
Canada B4A 4J4
info@mdrstrategy.ca www.theregistrar.ca
www.mdrstrategy.ca
© 2025. All rights reserved
From the Editor's Desk
As I sat down to write this issue’s note, I found myself reflecting on what topic felt most relevant. As a self-professed political aficionado, there was no question. On the heels of a federal election, it had to be that.
This election was not just about leadership. It was about labour, public services, and mobility. Both the Liberal and Conservative parties made bold commitments to break down barriers to credential recognition and professional licensing across provinces. Whether through a national mobility framework or a “Blue Seal” model, the idea is the same: professionals should be able to move freely and work across Canada without being re-licensed in each jurisdiction.
For regulators, this signals a moment of both challenge and opportunity. Mobility is entrenched in our Charter of Rights and Freedoms and is necessary, especially in sectors facing workforce shortages. But we all understand that the integrity of professional standards must remain non-negotiable. And as regulation largely sits within provincial and territorial jurisdiction, any move toward a national model must be approached through strategic collaboration, not knee-jerk reform.
The good news is that we’ve done this before. Regulators in Canada have long shown that interjurisdictional co-operation is possible and powerful when done thoughtfully. We can honour public protection while supporting a more integrated workforce. It’s not about saying no; it is about shaping how.
This issue of The Registrar magazine is exciting. With a focus on Western Canada, I’m especially pleased to spotlight Cindy Smith, executive director and registrar of the College of Registered Nurses of Saskatchewan. Her story aptly reflects both courage and clarity in a shifting regulatory landscape. But that is just the beginning. Settle in (dare I say turn off your phone) and let these pages take you into the layered, human world of regulation—where policy meets purpose and every story matters—for you and for the public that counts on your protection. Thank you for your interest.
M. Daniel Roukema
DEI in Regulation
Public Awareness
IN THE NEWS: REGULATORY SECTOR HEADLINES
Western
The College of Health and Care Professionals of B.C. (CHCPBC) will soon operate under new legislation called the Health Professions and Occupations Act, which will replace the current Health Professions Act. While the exact implementation date is yet to be announced, the updated legislation is part of ongoing efforts to modernize and strengthen the regulation of health professions in the province.
Central
Ontario’s new legislation, the Protect Ontario through Free Trade within Canada Act, enhances labour mobility by requiring regulators to recognize credentials of professionals from other provinces and territories without additional requirements. It streamlines the process for out-of-province professionals to work more quickly in Ontario, aligning with the Canadian Free Trade Agreement's goals of reducing internal trade barriers.
Beginning in April 2025, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) began regulating physician assistants (PAs) under the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991 and the Medicine Act, 1991. All PAs in Ontario must be registered with CPSO to legally use the title “physician assistant” or “PA.” CPSO is urging hospitals and physicians to ensure any PAs they work with have completed their registration.
Atlantic
The Nova Scotia College of Nursing (NSCN) appointed Douglas Bungay as its new CEO and registrar in March, succeeding Sue Smith. Bungay played a key role in modernizing the college’s registration practices and advancing nursing licensure in Nova Scotia. His career spans frontline nursing and regulatory roles.
P.E.I. regulators, the College of Licensed Practical Nurses of PEI (CLPNPEI) and the College of Registered Nurses and Midwives of PEI (CRNMPEI), conducted a fulsome public consultation to seek feedback on establishing a single regulatory body for the province’s nursing and midwifery professions. Earlier this year, the councils of both colleges held a joint discussion to assess creating a single regulatory body. Reflecting on recent changes in other Canadian jurisdictions, a decision was made to investigate the merits of this move in P.E.I..
Québec Finance Minister Éric Girard introduced Bill 92 in April 2025, proposing the merger of the province's two self-regulatory organizations overseeing insurance professionals: the Chambre de la sécurité financière (CSF) and the Chambre de l’assurance de dommages (ChAD). It aims to establish a single regulator, the Chambre de l’assurance, to oversee life, health, and general insurance representatives. The bill is currently under review, with opposition parties considering public consultations.
professionals and the clients they serve could benefit from the technology without undue risks. “Our goal with this study was to better understand where AI is already being used and where it’s heading,” says Harper. “Just as importantly, we needed to determine where regulatory gaps exist so we can establish proper guardrails.”
Early findings from the study highlighted several key regulatory areas of concern:
• Bias and fairness: AI models, if not carefully managed, may unintentionally discriminate based on gender, race or other protected characteristics.
• Transparency: Many AIdriven processes operate as “black boxes,” meaning their
decision-making mechanisms are not easily explainable.
• Accountability: If an AI model makes an incorrect or unfair decision, questions of who is responsible, whether the broker, the insurer, or software provider, will arise.
These concerns underscore the need for proactive regulation, Harper stresses. “If we don’t establish accountability from the start, we risk creating a system where no one is responsible for AI-driven mistakes,” she says.
Behavioural touchpoints in AI decision-making
Accountability remains one of the biggest challenges in widespread AI adoption according to Harper. The technology introduces new layers of automation and complexity, making it challenging to pinpoint responsibility when errors occur. “We have to ensure that AI remains a tool, not a decision-maker in itself,” Harper emphasizes. “[Regulated] brokers must remain accountable for the decisions made on behalf of their clients.”
This need for accountability extends beyond professional regulation due to its impact on consumer trust. Research from the Behavioural Insights Team (BIT), specializing in applying
“We have to ensure that AI remains a tool, not a decision-maker in itself.”
- Jessica Harper
Jessica Harper, director, licensing, policy and standards, RIBO
“There’s a well-documented psychological effect where people are more likely to trust human judgement than machine judgement, even in situations where humans make more errors.”
-Sasha Tregebov
behavioural science to policymaking, highlights how individuals react differently to AI-driven decisions compared to those made by humans.
“There's a well-documented psychological effect where people are more likely to trust human judgement than machine judgement, even in situations where humans make more errors,” explains Sasha Tregebov, director, Canada at BIT. “When AI makes a mistake, such as denying an insurance claim unfairly, it feels impersonal and opaque, leading to greater frustration.”
Tregebov notes that transparency plays a critical role in public perception. “People are more accepting of AI when they understand how it works and why a particular decision was made,” he says. “That’s why explainability should be a
core principle of AI regulation in insurance. We’ve seen that when companies are upfront about how AI models make decisions, even if the decision isn’t what the consumer wants, the consumer is more likely to accept it. The frustration comes when people don’t know why they’ve been denied coverage or received a different premium than expected.”
Another key insight from BIT’s research is the importance of human oversight in AI-driven decisions. “Even if AI makes an accurate decision 99 per cent of the time, that one per cent where it fails can have real consequences for people,” Tregebov explains. “That’s why a regulatory framework that ensures humans can step in and review decisions is still very important.”
Harper says that these discoveries have informed regulator approaches to consider policies that require AI-driven insurance decisions to be interpretable. “If a consumer can’t challenge or understand an AI decision, that’s a problem,” says Harper. “We need to ensure that people feel empowered, not sidelined, by this technology.”
Towards a delicate balance
Tregebov highlights a growing regulatory concern: Who takes responsibility when AI makes an incorrect decision? “If a client is denied coverage due to an
Sasha Tregebov, director, Canada, BIT
AI model’s assessment, what’s the recourse? Who’s accountable? These are questions regulators need to answer now before AI becomes more deeply embedded in the industry.”
Recognizing this, and extrapolating from the findings from BIT’s study, Harper says RIBO is developing a regulatory framework that will establish clear expectations for AI use in insurance brokerages. The regulatory mechanisms comprising RIBO’s AI initiative include developing clear AI guidelines, while making AI decisions more transparent, explainable, auditable and able to be challenged by clients using insurance brokerage services.
Ongoing monitoring, adjustment and industry collaboration also remain critical to this initiative, so that brokers, insurers, technology developers, and policymakers can engage in a regulatory environment that supports innovation without compromising ethical standards. “The worst-case scenario is an AI-driven system that reinforces biases or creates barriers for consumers,” Harper says. “Our job as regulators is to make sure AI is working for the public good, not just for efficiency or cost savings.”
Tregebov sees this as a critical moment for future-proofing concerns surrounding insurance regulation. “The way AI is introduced and governed now will set the stage for years to come,” he says.
“Getting it right today means avoiding significant issues down the road.”
With many tools in the insurance professional’s toolkit once seen as cutting-edge, now feeling like relics of another era, Harper says RIBO remains committed to supporting professionals before and after the establishment of a strong, regulated AI framework in Ontario. “The biggest misconception is that AI will replace brokers,” she says. “That’s not the future we see. AI should enhance a broker’s ability to serve their clients, not take their place. That’s the framework we’re building toward, one where AI supports human expertise, not overrides it. It [AI] has the potential to improve insurance outcomes in incredible ways, and our role is to ensure that happens responsibly.”
"This is just the beginning,” Harper concludes. “AI in insurance will evolve, and so will our approach. What matters is that we continue listening to brokers, insurers, regulators, and, most importantly, the public, to ensure that AI serves everyone fairly and effectively. How we regulate it today will define its role in insurance for years to come.”
“Our job as regulators is to make sure AI is working for the public good, not just for efficiency or cost savings.”
-Sasha Tregebov
"Everything we do comes back to the public, great leaders aren’t afraid to challenge the process, and that’s something I’ve taken to heart."
– Cindy Smith
“Imagine a system where licensing applications are processed in days instead of weeks, or where early warning signs in practice trends help us intervene before a crisis occurs.”
- Cindy Smith
Challenging nursing regulation’s status quo
Smith’s appointment as CRNS executive director and registrar in January 2019 marked a pivotal moment for both her career and the organization’s status quo. She took on the monumental task of guiding the College as the organization separated its regulatory responsibilities from its former advocacy functions. Smith embraced the challenge with a clear vision and says it allowed CRNS to fully commit to an enhanced regulatory mandate.
“Change is never easy, and this transition was no exception,” she reflects. “But, at the heart of it, we had to ask ourselves, ‘What is our primary role?’ The answer was clear: protecting the public through effective regulation.”
“The shift allowed us to strengthen our regulatory role, improve transparency, and build public trust,” Smith says. “It also ensured nurses are held to the highest professional standards and created space for others to advocate for the profession. Regulation and advocacy are both critical, but they serve different purposes. Our responsibility is public protection, and that must remain our singular focus,” she says, reiterating CRNS’s commitment to public protection.
Under Smith’s leadership, CRNS has continued to take bold steps to modernize its regulatory framework since divestment, while ensuring the public’s trust remains at the core of its mission.
This progressive approach has led to governance reforms, increased transparency, and a commitment to evidence-based decision-making through collaboration with government, health-care leaders, and the public.
As part of this work, Smith has contributed to advancing streamlined licensure recognition across provinces to help reduce barriers for nurses moving between jurisdictions. Provincially, CRNS is an active member of the Saskatchewan Public Regulatory Advisory Network (SPRAN), a collective of health regulators working together to align regulatory practices and strengthen public protection. CRNS also partners with other nursing regulators across Canada to support consistency in licensure mobility, workforce planning, and regulatory best practices. “At the end of the day, regulation should facilitate safe and effective practice, not create unnecessary hurdles,” she emphasizes. “We need to ask ourselves: are we making this easier or harder for nurses to provide quality care?”
“Nurses move across provinces, and our frameworks need to reflect that reality,” Smith affirms. “Through constant engagement, we can create a progressive system that is rigorous in public pro-
Reinforcing a strong workforce
Recent data from the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) shows that Saskatchewan is leading Western Canada in health-care staffing efforts. Smith attributes this to the importance of inclusivity, which ensures diverse voices in the nursing profession and from the public are heard. “We regulate in the public interest, which means our policies must reflect the needs and expectations of the people we serve,” she says. “Our workforce is dependent on nurses from all backgrounds, with different experiences and perspectives. That’s how we build a stronger, more resilient health-care system.”
One of Smith’s most notable initiatives as executive director and registrar has been improving pathways for internationally educated nurses (IENs) to join Saskatchewan’s health-care workforce. Recognizing the urgent need for skilled nurses, CRNS has worked closely with the provincial government, employers, and educators to simplify and accelerate licensing processes while maintaining high regulatory standards.
“We have incredible talent coming from around the world,” Smith says. “Our role is to provide the right supports and assessments to help them succeed in our health care system.”
CRNS emphasizes Saskatchewan Polytechnic’s transition program, a collaborative effort with the National Nursing Assessment Service (NNAS), CRNS, and employers designed to help IENs integrate smoothly by providing them with mentorship and resources to meet Saskatchewan’s practice standards. The college also implemented centralized assessment processes with NNAS to reduce duplication and improve the
speed at which internationally trained nurses can enter the workforce. “We need these professionals in our healthcare system, and we need them now,” Smith states. “If we don’t act quickly, we risk losing skilled nurses to other jurisdictions. Saskatchewan should be a place where nurses want to come, stay, and thrive.”
It’s why CRNS was recently recognized as a Top Employer for 2025, a distinction that Smith says represents the college’s push for innovation and professional growth. She credits CRNS staff and the supportive and inclusive workplace culture for creating the work environment that makes innovation possible. “In five years, I want us to be known not just for enforcing standards, but for innovating them,” she says. “Regulation shouldn’t be about maintaining the status quo, but rather, be about pushing the profession forward in a way that ultimately benefits patients.”
Embodying leadership
Smith envisions future regulatory frameworks to be even more proactive, adaptable, and responsive to the evolving health-care landscape. CRNS is positioned as a leader in shaping the future of health-care regulation, she says, and the college will continue to provide guidance on key regulatory touchpoints, such as workforce shortages and opti-
mizing the scope of practice for nursing professionals.
While divestment marked a pivotal shift for the college, Smith foresees a greater role for regulators in advocating for policy changes that support the nursing profession. “Regulation and advocacy don’t have to be at odds,” she says. “We can champion policy improvements that benefit both nurses and the public while staying true to our regulatory mandate.”
Smith’s regulatory leadership is defined by a rare combination of pragmatism and vision; a perspective she says was heavily inspired by American leadership scholar Barry Posner.
“One of the things I admire about Posner’s work is the idea that leaders have to ‘model the way,’ and that you can’t just set expectations,” she says. “You must embody them. In regulation, that means leading with transparency, accountability, and a commitment to the public good.”
“Everything we do comes back to the public,” she concludes. “Great leaders aren’t afraid to challenge the process, and that’s something I’ve taken to heart. The best way to serve the nursing profession isn’t to preserve the status quo, but rather, to push boundaries and rethink what’s possible.”
“Regulation and advocacy don’t have to be at odds,” she says. “We can champion policy improvements that benefit both nurses and the public while staying true to our regulatory mandate.”
- Cindy Smith
Communications Corner
STEP BACK TO MOVE FORWARD
Building public trust through connection and understanding
Collette
Deschenes, director of communications strategy, MDR Strategy Group
MDR’s CEO Daniel Roukema often jokes that between the two of us, we’re “recovering reg-
It’s true. Before MDR, we collectively worked for seven different regulatory bodies. What he means by that is that we understand the realities of regulation. The pain points. And as communicators, we deeply understand the challenges of public communication and engagement.
Having worked across multiple colleges regulating different professions, and now supporting reg-
ulators across the country through MDR, I’ve seen first-hand that public understanding of regulation and public trust take time to build. It requires dedicated, clear, consistent communication. And that work begins with understanding who your public is, what they know, and what they need to know. Developing a solid foundation of understanding helps regulators in their efforts toward stronger and effective, public engagement.
More than a decade ago, I stepped into my first regulatory role as a very new communicator, working in communications at the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alber-
Collette Deschenes, director of communications strategy, MDR Strategy Group
ta (CPSA). I’ll admit that I didn’t yet fully understand regulation. To be honest, I’m still learning, especially as the sector evolves and the field of communications continues to shift just as quickly. But I was eager to deepen my understanding and contribute in a meaningful way. What I did understand early on was that the organization was leading in many ways, including through its efforts to support effective public communication.
One of my first responsibilities was helping to coordinate and attend CPSA’s regional tour, where the regulator visited communities across Alberta to meet faceto-face with physicians and the public. They included town hall meetings where the public could ask questions, raise concerns, and speak directly with the regulator about health-care delivery in their community.
What struck me most was how much listening took place. The goal wasn’t just to explain CPSA’s role, although that was part of it. It was to better understand how the public experienced care, and how regulation could respond with greater clarity and accountability. This all led to a deeper understanding of CPSA’s public.
That experience stayed with me throughout my regulatory communications career. It was a clear example of how connection, listening, and education can help
lay the groundwork for stronger relationships with the public. It also reinforced something I’ve seen again and again in my work with regulators: building public understanding is a journey, and trust doesn’t happen overnight. It takes clear, consistent, and strategic communication to lay the foundation for both.
While I know, as someone who loves creative content development, it may not feel as exciting as launching campaigns or jumping into engagement tactics, it often means pausing to take a step back. Pausing to ask key questions, take stock of what you’re already doing, and dedicate time to strategy and understanding before jumping into execution.
Are your communications channels aligned?
If you direct the public from a social post or public awareness ad to your website, will they find information that’s easy to understand and take action if needed?
Are you unintentionally using regulatory jargon or acronyms that make sense to us as regulators (and recovering regulators) but create barriers for the public? Remember, plain language doesn’t make information less important. It makes it more accessible so you can meet the public, and all your audiences, where they are.
Are you ready to enhance your regulatory communications?
www.mdrstrategy.ca
MDR’s regulatory communications expertise can support your organization in building trust, improving stakeholder relationships, and achieving your communication goals.
Join other regulators across Canada who choose the MDR solution to deliver their messages with meaning and purpose. Contact us at info@mdrstrategy.ca.
Does your messaging consistently explain who you are, what you do, and why that matters to them? It can feel like we’re repeating ourselves, hopefully in different and engaging ways, but repetition builds recognition. And clear, consistent messaging helps build trust.
The list of questions can go on, but the simple message is that this work takes time, intention, and a willingness to start with the basics. If we want the public to understand regulation and trust the work we do, we need to earn that trust at every touchpoint. That means showing
up clearly, consistently, and with a real effort to connect. Even face to face when
we can.
I think that’s the benefit of being “recovering regulators.” We’ve been there and we understand how easy it is to get caught up in internal language, pressures, and delivering tactics. But we’ve also seen the power of stepping back, listening closely, and building strong foundations.
That’s where public trust begins.
CELEBRATING MDR STRATEGY GROUP’S
Episode 9 of The Registrar Podcast features a candid interview with CEO Daniel Roukema.
In this special episode, staff turn the mic on their leader to explore the state of licensing and professional regulation, the firm’s vision and growth, being awarded an international award for regulatory excellence, and what it takes to lead a successful social enterprise.
It’s thoughtful, honest, fun, and full of insight for anyone interested in the dynamics of leadership, strategy, and perseverance. Listen now on all podcast platforms!
AI in Regulation
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE EVOLVING REGULATOR
Protecting the public interest in an age of algorithms
Melissa Peneycad, director, public engagement strategy and special advisor on AI
MDR Strategy Group
Regardless of the professionals they license and regulate, all regulatory bodies exist to protect the public interest.
They do this by ensuring that professionals such as doctors, engineers, teachers, social workers, and others meet rigorous standards to enter and remain in practice. They enforce legislation, standards of practice, codes of conduct, manage
a complaint and discipline process, and apply disciplinary actions when needed. While these core responsibilities are universal across regulators and have not changed, the context in which regulators operate is shifting rapidly.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is no longer a future consideration, but part of our present reality. From clinical decision support and algorithmic hiring platforms to generative de-
MDR Strategy Group’s director of public engagement strategy and special advisor on AI, Melissa Peneycad
sign, process automation, and predictive analytics, AI is transforming the work of the professions regulators license and regulate. But what about regulators themselves? Can AI help them better uphold their public protection mandate? Should it? And if so, how can it be implemented responsibly?
In this article, I explore how AI can support and strengthen regulators’ public interest mandates. It also highlights key strategic, ethical, and operational considerations for regulatory leaders seeking to evolve their organizations with care, clarity, and credibility.
Upholding the public interest in a changing world
Regulators are tasked with protecting the public by ensuring that only qualified and competent professionals are licensed to practice. This involves setting entry-to-practice standards, maintaining codes of professional conduct, managing complaint and discipline processes, and applying corrective action where needed, from mandatory training to license suspension or, in the most serious cases, revocation.
These are not abstract responsibilities. They directly impact people’s health, safety, rights, and financial well-being. Therefore, as the world changes technologically, socially, and economically, so too should our approach to licensing and professional regulation. For example, new risks emerge, public needs and expectations shift, and the complexity of decision-making grows.
Enter AI.
While AI has raised legitimate concerns around bias,
transparency, and overreach, it also offers promise and potential for regulators.
AI as a tool for public protection
AI is already used in sectors like healthcare, education, and finance to analyze large datasets, detect anomalies, and support decision-making. For regulators, similar applications are beginning to take shape, and they deserve attention. For example:
• Triage and intake: Natural language processing (NLP) models can help analyze and categorize complaints as they arrive, flagging potentially high-risk cases for faster human review. This doesn’t replace human judgment; it augments it. The same approach can be extended to applications for licensure. In the last issue of The Registrar, we interviewed Dr. Michael P. Cary, Duke University’s inaugural AI health scholar, whose work explores AI applications enhancing licensure processes through careful, human-centred evaluation.
• Public support: AI-powered chatbots can assist members of the public in navigating complex regulatory websites and enhance accessibility when designed with clear boundaries and appropriate oversight. These tools can provide 24/7 support, answering frequently asked questions, directing users to relevant resources, or helping them understand how to file a complaint or check a professional’s status.
• Data-driven insights: AI-powered analytics can help regulators identify trends in complaints, disciplinary outcomes, or professional conduct,
“One of the most important things a regulator can do is ask: Is AI the right tool for this problem?”
– Melissa Peneycad
offering a more proactive approach to risk management.
• Continuous competence: AI can support monitoring of continuing professional development (CPD) through tools that track, assess, or even personalize registrant learning over time.
• Administrative efficiency: Automating repetitive administrative tasks, such as document review, redaction, or case categorization, can free up skilled staff to focus on higher-value work.
These innovations aren’t about doing more with less.
Rather, they’re about doing better with what we have, for example, improved risk identification, enhanced public protection, and the provision of more thoughtful and fairer support for registrants during the licensure application, renewal, and even investigation processes.
Strategic fit matters
Despite the potential, not every regulatory task is well suited for AI. One of the most important things a regulator can do is ask: Is AI the right tool for this problem?
Several strategic questions can help
guide the decision, some of which include:
• Is the task high-volume, repetitive, and data-heavy? AI excels at these.
• Does the task require nuanced, ethical, or context-rich decisionmaking? AI may assist, but human oversight is essential.
• Can the outcomes of AI use be explained and justified? If not, it may erode trust.
• Will this improve fairness, efficiency, or effectiveness for the public? That’s the bottom line.
Being intentional about AI adoption helps regulators avoid implementing tech because it’s “on trend” and instead focus on tools that genuinely support their mandate.
Ethics, transparency, and trust
Perhaps the most significant challenge for regulators adopting AI is maintaining trust with registrants, staff, and the public.
AI tools are only as good as the data they’re trained on. Poor or biased data can lead to unfair outcomes and algorithms that cannot be explained or appear to “black box” important decisions, risk undermining credibility and procedural fairness. Therefore, to uphold trust, I argue that regulators must ensure
human oversight over all AI-driven decisions, use explainable models wherever possible, establish clear and transparent policies on when and how AI will be used, and conduct regular audits to ensure fairness, accuracy, and alignment with legal and ethical standards. AI should never replace human judgment; it should support it. After all, public protection depends on what decisions are made, how they’re made, and who is accountable for them.
Becoming an AI-ready regulator
Integrating AI into the operations of a regulatory body should not be viewed as simply a tech initiative but as an organizational transformation, and I contend it starts with education and mindset.
1. Build digital fluency:
Regulators should understand how AI affects, or could affect, the professions they regulate and their regulatory responsibilities. This doesn’t mean regulators need to become data scientists; it means becoming informed decision-makers.
2. Promote a culture of innovation:
Regulatory bodies are, by necessity, risk aware. However, it’s important to note that innovation and public protection aren’t mutually exclusive. Regulatory leaders can create safe spaces to test, learn, and iterate, anchored by strong values and clear accountability.
3. Communicate with purpose:
Introduce AI changes with transparency and clarity. Explain why a new tool is being adopted, what it will (and will not) do, and how it aligns with the public interest.
4. Engage stakeholders early and meaningfully: Understanding how AI is perceived by registrants, staff, and the public is essential. Conduct surveys, host roundtables, or include registrant representatives in working groups. Engagement builds trust, identifies concerns early, and helps shape solutions better aligned with stakeholder expectations.
5. Establish an AI vision, goals, and meaningful KPIs:
Begin by articulating a clear vision for how AI aligns with your regulatory mandate. Set measurable goals that reflect both efficiency and fairness. Then, define KPIs to monitor progress, such as turnaround times for resolving complaints, application processing improvements, registrant satisfaction, or early risk detection. Combine quantitative and qualitative metrics to capture a complete picture of success.
6. Develop an implementation plan:
A roadmap is essential for responsible integration. This includes identifying priority areas, selecting appropriate tools, setting timelines, ensuring adequate training, and defining accountability. Pilots, phased rollouts, and clear evaluation checkpoints can help regulators learn and adapt as they go.
7. Collaborate across the sector:
AI readiness doesn’t need to be done in isolation. Sector-wide dialogue, resource sharing, and collaborative pilots reduce duplication and strengthen outcomes. This was a central theme at our February 2025 AI in Regulation conference, which brought together regulators from across Canada, the United States, and Europe to share use cases, explore governance frameworks, discuss ethical
“Like it or hate it, it’s a technology we must all be prepared to understand and use to our benefit and the benefit of the public we are charged with protecting.”
– Melissa Peneycad
considerations, and collectively advance sector-wide readiness.
Going from risk to readiness
Like most organizations, regulatory bodies don’t have the luxury of standing still. As AI continues to reshape the world of work, and the very professions they license and regulate, regulatory bodies must rise to meet the moment.
Being AI-ready isn’t about adopting every new tool or chasing trends. It’s about understanding the landscape, asking the right questions, and ensuring that any use of AI serves one purpose above all else: protecting the public.
At MDR Strategy Group, we believe that readiness is more than just awareness—it’s a way of thinking and operating that supports responsible innovation across the regulatory sector. As the
conversation around AI in professional regulation continues to evolve, we are working closely with regulatory leaders to explore how best to prepare for the opportunities and challenges ahead. If your organization is beginning to think about AI’s role in licensing, conduct, complaints, or organizational operations, we’d be happy to start the conversation. Whether through a tailored educational session or strategic dialogue, we can help you explore what AI readiness could look like in your context.
In today’s world, protecting the public interest isn’t just about managing risk; it’s about anticipating it. This requires tools, systems, and strategies built for the complexity of the world in which we live. AI is not going away.
Like it or hate it, it’s a technology we must all be prepared to understand and use to our benefit and the benefit of the public we are charged with protecting.
Investigator Insights
THE SILENT BURDEN
Vicarious trauma in investigative work
Dean Benard, president and CEO Benard + Associates
Vicarious trauma, also known as secondary traumatic stress, occurs when professionals are indirectly exposed to the trauma of others, leading to emotional and psychological distress. This phenomenon is prevalent among those who work closely with trauma survivors, including investigators, therapists, and first responders.
According to the American Counseling Association, vicarious trauma is “the emotional residue of exposure that counselors have from working with people as they are
hearing their trauma stories and become witnesses to the pain, fear, and terror that trauma survivors have endured.”1
The emotional toll on investigators
Investigators often delve into distressing cases involving harassment, abuse, exploitation, and other forms of misconduct. This repeated exposure can lead to significant emotional exhaustion and stress.
As noted in a study published in the Journal of Interprofessional
Dean Benard, president and CEO, Benard + Associates
Education & Practice, “Vicarious trauma, while it is different from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), is associated with comparable symptoms, including re-experiencing, avoidance, and hyperarousal.2
Dr. Stephen Hydon, director at the University of Southern California’s School of Social Work , emphasizes that secondary traumatic stress is akin to PTSD but stems from indirect exposure: “Secondary traumatic stress is like PTSD, but it’s not your trauma. It’s the trauma of someone that you’re working with.”3
Recognizing the signs
The manifestations of vicarious trauma can be subtle and varied. Common signs include:
• Emotional exhaustion: feeling drained and overwhelmed.
• Increased anxiety: heightened stress levels and irritability.
• Depersonalization: emotional detachment from work and clients.
• Physical symptoms: headaches, fatigue, and gastrointestinal issues.
A resource from PositivePsychology.com outlines these effects, noting that “ongoing exposure to clients’ trauma stories can lead to emotional exhaustion.”4
The stigma of seeking help
Despite the prevalence of vicarious trauma, many professionals hesitate to seek support due to stigma and fear of professional repercussions. The case of Dr. Lorna Breen, an ER physician who died by suicide after battling exhaustion and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic, underscores the critical need for systemic change. Her family advocates that “doctors shouldn’t be ‘punished’ for seeking support.”5
Organizational responsibility
Organizations employing investigators must proactively address vicarious trauma by:
• Implementing regular debriefings.
• Offering training on vicarious trauma.
• Promoting a supportive culture.
A publication from the Government of British Columbia emphasizes the importance of creating a supportive work environment that encourages debriefing and provides opportunities for staff to discuss the impact of their work.6
Strategies for investigators
Investigators and their organizations can take several steps to mitigate the potential vicarious trauma or mental health impacts of their work. Bridge the Gapp Knowledge Centre offers a list of personal, professional, and organizational approaches to helping combat the impact.7
Organizational/professional:
• Creating awareness of vicarious trauma and the impacts on a person in the workplace helps to normalize the experience.
• Developing a supportive work environment that encourages debriefing of work-related issues.
• Taking regular breaks, mental health days and availing of peer support.
• Assessing and changing workload which may involve rebalancing caseload and workload reduction.
• Improving access to professional development and training.
• Providing opportunities for staff to safely discuss the impact of work on their personal and professional lives.
Personal:
• Improve self-care by taking time for hobbies and personal interests that feel good.
• Maintain social support at home and at work.
• Increase self-awareness by
tuning in to stress signals.
• Reflect on current feelings and reactions, as well as the influence of past experiences.
• Monitor your work–life balance.
• Check in on your job satisfaction.
• Limit exposure to trauma-related material, such as news stories or movies.
• Access regular coaching, counselling and supervision to help counterbalance any existing vulnerability, such as a personal trauma history.
Practical strategies for managing emotional impact during investigative interviews
During an interview, investigators can experience a sense of feeling trapped and unable to manage the feelings created as they listen and gather information. They are working to minimize trauma in the interviewee, and this can create stress and impact their own performance as they manage the push and pull of the interaction, caring for the interviewee, and often putting themselves last. Here are some things to consider as you work to manage the emotional impact:
1. Ground yourself before and after each interview
Take a few minutes before the interview to center yourself. Simple breathing exercises, brief mindfulness moments, or setting a clear intention for the interview can make a meaningful difference. After the interview, allow time to decompress, don’t rush into the next task.
Tip: Try the box breathing method to reduce stress ‘4-4-4’ breathing method: inhale for 4 seconds, hold for 4, exhale for 4.
2. Use objective framing to maintain boundaries
Emotionally difficult content can become overwhelming when we start personalizing it. Maintain a clear mental separation between the speaker’s experience and your role in documenting it.
Mental mantra: “I am here to listen and document—not to absorb or fix.”
3. Acknowledge, but don’t absorb
Empathy is essential, but over-identifying with the individual can lead to emotional exhaustion. Use compassionate responses like “I appreciate you sharing that” without internalizing the distress.
4. Take notes strategically
If the content is disturbing, taking notes can create a degree of emotional distance. It anchors you in the task of evidence collection rather than emotional reaction.
Note: Be mindful of tone and body language to remain present and supportive while documenting.
5. Have a personal signal or reset mechanism
Some investigators use small, unobtrusive physical reminders, a smooth stone in their pocket, a bracelet, or even a breath pattern, to stay grounded during intense moments. These act as reset tools when emotional overwhelm begins to rise.
6. Remember you too can take a break
We often tell those we interview that if they need a break they just need to ask. There could be times you need that break too, try to plan as the interview unfolds for a moment you can call for a short break, without disrupting the flow of the interview. This is a judgement
call, but sometimes the one to make.
7. Debrief with a trusted peer or supervisor
After a particularly difficult interview, don’t keep it bottled up. A quick debrief, even a five-minute vent or check-in, can provide emotional release and validation.
8. Monitor your internal dialogue
Be aware of self-talk that could signal emotional strain (“This is too much,” “I can’t do this anymore”). These thoughts aren’t failure, but cues that you need a break or support.
9. Normalize the impact
Understand that having an emotional response doesn’t make you less professional. It makes you human. Make space for reflection and
know when to say, “I need to take care of myself so I can continue doing this work well.
10. Build a ritual of closure
Develop a small ritual at the end of your day to signal to your body and mind that work is over. This might include closing your laptop, stepping outside, journaling, or changing into non-work clothes. Over time, this tells your nervous system it’s safe to rest.
Vicarious trauma is an inherent risk in investigative work, but it doesn’t have to be an inevitable consequence. By acknowledging its presence, fostering supportive organizational cultures, and implementing proactive strategies, we can safeguard the mental health of those dedicated to seeking truth and justice.
1 American Counseling Association. Vicarious Trauma. Available at: https://positivepsychology.com/vicarious-trauma
2 Knight, C. (2021). Vicarious trauma in health and social care: Exploring the link with PTSD symptoms. Journal of Interprofessional Education & Practice, Volume 25. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405452621000380
3 Stephen Hydon, quoted in: Will, M. (2018). After the Fires, L.A. Teachers Are Experiencing Secondary Trauma, According to One Expert. The 74 Million. Available at: https://www.the74million.org/article/ after-the-fires-la-teachers-are-experiencing-secondary-trauma-according-to-one-expert
4 Ackerman, C. E. (2023). Vicarious Trauma: What It Is and How to Cope. PositivePsychology. com. Available at: https://positivepsychology.com/vicarious-trauma
5 Feist, C. (2021). Dr. Lorna Breen Died by Suicide. Her Family Wants to Protect Other Health Care Workers From the Same Fate. TIME Magazine. Available at: https://time.com/6100300/corey-feist-lorna-breen
6 Government of British Columbia. Vicarious Trauma and Organizational Supports – Resource List. Available at: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/health/managing-your-health/mental-health-substanceuse/child-teen-mental-health/vicarious_trauma_and_organization_resource_list.pdf
7 Compassion Fatigue & Vicarious Trauma – Knowledge Centre. Bridge the Gapp. Available at: https:// bridgethegapp.ca/adult-national/knowledge-centre/compassion-fatigue-vicarious-trauma
man angle to it, shaped by his cultural background and the Eastern value of collective well-being.
Upon arriving in Canada, he earned his master’s in public administration and social work at Western University and the University of British Columbia, respectively, before obtaining his PhD in social work at the University of Calgary. The opportunity to blend two worldviews of the profession shaped Kwok’s foundational approach to his work, centred on ethics, humility and understanding – a perspective that grew into a lifelong commitment to supporting the profession through regulatory leadership.
“In Eastern traditions, we think in terms of family, community, and lineage.” he says. “Even our surnames are tied to ancestry. In Western contexts, it’s more individualistic, focused on self-actualization and personal growth. I try to bring those perspectives together in how I teach and lead.”
“There’s a saying I live by: I don’t mind if people don’t understand me, but I do mind if I don’t understand people,” he stresses. “That’s the essence of social work. Your job is to understand others, not to be understood yourself.”
He continues, “when someone comes into your office, it’s not your turn to share. It’s their turn to speak. You are there to listen deeply. That’s your role.”
Three roles, one profession
Kwok sees the ideal regulated social worker as someone who wears three hats. “The first hat is the practitioner, because this is a practice degree,” he explains. “You cannot just talk, you have to have the practice and then translate your knowledge into day-to-day life.”
He says the second and third roles social workers wear centres on research and education, respectively. “You have to conceptualize your experience and elevate it into a principle that you can test and apply to other cases,” he says. “The last one is educator. If you’ve practiced, and if your practice is informed by research, then you have a responsibility to mentor the next generation of social workers.”
Reiterating his lessons from teaching social research and public administration has informed his philosophy of mentorship, Kwok says “If you’ve benefited from the profession, you have an obligation to support others entering it.” He therefore urges social workers to share their learning beyond one-on-one relationships.
Overseeing transformative regulatory processes
Kwok credits both his tenure as president for the Canadian Council of Social Work Regulators (CCSWR) from 2022 to 2024, along with his studies in municipal policy at Western University, as critical to understanding how regulation and community service intersect. “I was learning alongside local mayors. That was an incredible experience. It showed me how policies are shaped in real time and why social workers need to be at those tables, not just responding to policy, but influencing it.”
A call from a former student first prompted Kwok’s involvement with the ACSW council, an opportunity he admits he hadn’t previously considered. Though initially reluctant, he agreed, motivated by a sense of responsibility and the hope that others would follow. “If I put my name forward, maybe my students would
too,” he reflects. “We all need to take part in building the systems we’re part of.”
After assuming the role of in 2021, he brought with him a governance mindset that was shaped by multi-jurisdictional experiences and an extensive theoretic understanding of the profession. through which the fundamentals of regulation have guided his leadership. “A profession exists through a contract with society,” he says. “We must earn and maintain the public’s trust through professional standards, not just good intentions.”
Kwok’s term as council president coincided with a significant transition for ACSW, moving from a dual to a single mandate focused solely on public protection. Alberta’s Bill 46, the Health Statutes Amendment Act (2020) (No.2), required all dual mandate organizations that regulated and represented the voice of their professions to divest themselves of their advocacy roles. ACSW completed this in 2022, and Kwok reflects on how the organizational transformation was considerable.
“It was a big change,” he recalls. “It doesn’t mean we don’t care about social workers, but our loyalty must be to the public interest first.”
He also presided over the development of a new code of ethics, a foundational document he sees as more than procedural. “A code of ethics can’t just say, ‘be a good person,’” Kwok says. “That’s not enough. We need language that translates to real behaviours, things we can evaluate, teach, and enforce. Otherwise, we’re not truly protecting the public.”
“This is your book,” he would tell registrants. “It’s your professional compass for the next 15 years. Read it. Understand it. Own it.”
Building an inclusive and accountable profession
Equity, diversity, inclusion (EDI) and Indigenous engagement were central to Kwok’s tenure at ACSW, commitments that will likely define his legacy and commitment to the profession. He sees them not as buzzwords but as essential tools for improving both practice and policy. In his view, a diverse council – one that reflects the community it serves – makes better decisions. “You can’t serve people effectively if you don’t understand their cultural context,” he affirms.
“Our clients come from all walks of
“A profession exists through a contract with society, we must earn and maintain the public’s trust through professional standards, not just good intentions.” – Dr. Siu Ming Kwok
life,” he says. “Diversity is not just about who we serve, but in who is making the decisions. That includes council tables, leadership positions, and educational settings.”
He highlights how the profession today looks very different than it did just 20 years ago. “When I look at my council, it includes people from racialized backgrounds, Indigenous communities, immigrants, and
that makes a difference,” he proudly says. “They bring perspectives others can’t, and that helps us make better decisions.”
Kwok warns that EDI initiatives must be genuine, not transactional or performative. “It’s not about optics. It’s about creating space for lived experiences to shape policies and standards. That’s how you build trust with
Outgoing president of the Alberta College of Social Workers (ACSW) Dr. Siu Ming Kwok
communities, and how you create meaningful, informed regulation.”
Due to the profession’s fractious history with Indigenous communities, and the ongoing need to rebuild trust, he says that many vulnerable clients are not always willing participants. “We can’t forget the past,” he says. “Social work played a role in harmful policies like the residential school system and child removals. There’s mistrust. We must acknowledge that, and we must work together with Indigenous communities in a respectful and equitable way.
ACSW is currently implementing an action plan to weave the fundamental principles of reconciliation, equity, diversity, and inclusion (REDI) into its core functions, policies, and culture to ensure all aspects of its work embraces equitable, respectful, and collaborative relationships with Indigenous and other equity deserving peoples.
An impactful legacy
As Kwok steps away from his role, his vision for social work continues to resonate with the College and beyond: building a profession rooted in ethical practice, shaped by lived experiences, and commit-
ted to understanding those it serves. Reflecting on what kind of legacy he hopes to leave behind, he shares, “If I’ve contributed to clearer standards, better education, and more inclusive regulation, I’m proud of that. But more than anything, I hope I’ve helped people reflect on why they chose this profession.”
When asked what advice he would offer future council members and regulatory leaders, Kwok emphasizes the importance of connection between action and accountability. “Link your standards to your strategic goals. Tie your goals to your reporting. Show the public not just what you’re doing, but why it matters. And always remember, you’re not protecting a profession. You’re upholding the public trust.”
For Kwok, understanding has always been the foundation of service. “Understanding is the first step to service. It’s not enough to want to help. You must learn why people think and feel the way they do. Only then can we work together toward real solutions.”
“Link your standards to your strategic goals. Tie your goals to your reporting. Show the public not just what you’re doing, but why it matters.”
– Dr. Siu Ming Kwok
AI IN REGULATION CONFERENCE
Leading the conversation on innovation, collaboration, and next steps for the regulatory
sector
The Registrar staff
On February 11th, MDR Strategy Group hosted AI in Regulation: Global Perspectives and Local Leadership, bringing together more than 130 regulatory professionals, thoughtleaders and sector innovators. The event sparked timely conversations on the realities, opportunities and challenges of the impact of AI in licensing and professional regulation. Keynote speakers and panelists shared real-world examples and raised critical ethical questions about AI in regulation: How can regulators leverage AI to enhance efficiency and decision-making? What are the associated risks, and how can they be mitigated? And how should regulation evolve when technology advances faster than policy?
While AI offers new ways to streamline operations and strengthen public protection, one message rang clear: regulators must remain in the driver’s seat,
setting clear expectations and keeping human judgment at the centre of AI governance.
A key theme throughout the day was the importance of balance. AI can be used to improve risk assessment, support compliance and boost efficiency — but only when paired with thoughtful oversight. Speakers emphasized that AI should be a tool to support, not replace, regulatory decision-making. Discussions highlighted the need for clear guidelines and adaptable policies that keep the public interest front and centre. Ethical considerations, they stressed, must be built into AI governance from the beginning — not added later as an afterthought.
Review key takeaways from the conference [
