Digest opened free editor
Rola Khaleda, FT editor, chooses her favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.
The writer, a FT, who is a chief executive of the Royal Society of Arts and former Economists at the Bank of England
There is an ocean of the difference between the political philosophies of governments on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. But along one political dimension, the United States and the United Kingdom are compatible with the desire to cancel the work of work. The task is enormous with the books of rules and organizers who have been associated over the past fifty years.
Beyond that the similarities end. In the United States, the liberation campaign is an article of political faith. In the United Kingdom, it is a political necessity generated by weak growth. This discrimination is reflected in very different ways. The cancellation of restrictions is treated: the best way to dismantle the towering organizational Babylon tower that was held from the bricks for many decades?
The instincts of the new American administration are to destroy the organizational tower on the ground and only to build on the basis of needs (or needs). Depending on the design, this burning approach-Earth provides a transformation in the system in culture and practice. It eliminates the deadly weight costs of organizational transgression at a minimum risk.
This is in a blatant contradiction with the UK government's approach to date. This started with the creation of a new organizational innovation office. Nobody argues with the principle of organizational innovation. But the belief that the solution to the regulatory spread is to create a new organizational agency is a logic that challenges gravity.
Late last year, the Sir Kerr Starmer government began implementing the organizers to determine the priorities of growth. But as long as these bodies have legal states with their primary interest is risk, not growth, this is a cheap talk.
At the end of last year, the organizers were asked to volunteer sacrifices from their ruling books. Incredibly, the Roman roosters did not welcome Christmas news. Follow a frightening sequence of “Dear Santa” messages, with small possible effects on growth. Sharsakh, the government has recently stimulated tactics similar to soprano with leadership before Explore the head of competition and markets.
This irregular approach will not lead to a permanent change. Bricks from bricks cannot be dismantled to a tall tower to transform cultures and organizational practices. The first law of thermal dynamics applies to the organization as well as energy: there is no urgent organizational brick that has been removed from another that replaces it.
In fact, this was the experience of the UK government so far. Amid the metastatic discourse, the new organizational bricks were placed in the wall, some of which are according to the design (such as the Employment Rights Bill), while others in response to public noise (such as Fiasco in the position of Oasis tickets). This bustle will not give up. As heroes of workers in the worker, the ministers will not be able to resist it.
The UK government is scheduled to be a organizational action plan for the month of March. Like its growth plan, this contains everything that afflicts the tragedy of Shakespeare: sound and anger does not indicate anything – or nothing systematic to answer the issue. Certainly, you will overwhelm the strategy of selective pruning quickly. By removing a paper from the American play book, the peripheral transformation in cultures and organizational practices may be possible.
The UK does not need more than 90 distinguished organizers, some of which are intertwined, and they employ several thousand people who have bases that work on millions of pages. The government must adhere to at least this number, while reducing an equivalent budget. As the cabinet knows well, there is nothing like cost restrictions to change business models and cultures.
If growth wants to obtain equal bills in regulatory priorities, a double legal mandate will be needed. Since higher growth requires more risks, the new statute should also determine the government's tolerance of consumer loss clearly. This is a social option that politicians can only take – then take responsibility when the losses and general noise rises. This leaves the organizers unrestricted to work in line with this mandate.
The best way to reduce consumer losses is through strong strict incentives at the top of organized organizations. A regulatory system focuses on the penalties carried out by the executives (instead of the organizer), including their dismissal in a state of failure, will do so. These incentives and then accommodate organizations, which reduces the need to comply with each level of pyramid.
Moreover, Professor Andrew Lu's work at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology showed how artificial intelligence can be used to determine overlap and contradictions in complex legal and regulatory books. Thus, artificial intelligence can provide a cheap and effective tool to simplify the books of rules and automation of compliance – this may significantly reduce the bureaucratic burdens.
Each government has defended living memory. They have failed in the same reason that they are now failing-following a brick strategy of bricks in increasing privacy. UK chancellor says she wants to enhance companies' business lives in the United Kingdom, similar to Trump. The adoption of the American liberation philosophy of seeking forgiveness instead of permission provides the best opportunity to do so.
