Regulation isn’t an obstacle to product autonomy — it’s a design constraint. Treating it as a blockade that must be skirted will slow teams, increase risk and invite the very bureaucracy you’re trying to avoid. The smarter choice is to make compliance an ingredient of your product model so teams can move fast, safely, and with clear purpose.
Why regulated businesses struggle with product autonomy
Most organisations treat compliance as an afterthought: legal stamps a box, IT locks a vault, and product teams wait for permission. That model creates three predictable failures:
- Slow decisions: Every small change needs sign-off, killing momentum.
- Command-and-control: Risk-averse central teams become gatekeepers instead of enablers.
- Hidden technical debt: Workarounds proliferate because teams cannot ship proper solutions under the constraints.
Those failures show up across sectors — from financial services to healthcare and education. They also feed a wider decay: when platforms prioritise short-term monetisation or internal convenience over users, we see the symptoms Cory Doctorow calls enshittification. Avoiding that fate in regulated industries requires deliberate design.
Three practical patterns to align autonomy with compliance
1. Build compliance into the product team, not around it
Move legal, compliance and security from reviewers to team members. Embed a compliance specialist in each product trio — product, design and engineering — who is empowered to translate regulation into implementation constraints and acceptance criteria. This is not about lawyers writing user stories; it is about making rules actionable.
When rules live inside the team, trade-offs happen where they should — during discovery and sprint planning — not at release gates.
2. Define guardrails, not gates
Rigid gating processes grind speed to a halt. Instead, codify guardrails: automated checks, manifest-driven risk assessments and test suites that fail builds if thresholds are crossed. Think of guardrails as a safety net that lets your teams practice autonomy while preventing catastrophic mistakes.
Stripe offers a good example of operationalising trust through tooling: developers can self-serve PCI compliance examples and integrations from documentation and APIs rather than queueing a central team for every change (see Stripe). The same principle — platformised compliance — scales in any regulated context.
3. Use discovery to de-risk, not to defer responsibility
Discovery is where compliance should be clarified, not kicked down the road. Use short, regulated BDD (Behaviour-Driven Development) cycles that explicitly verify legal assumptions with regulators or compliance SMEs early. This saves months of rework that often happens when teams deliver features that later need redesigning to meet regulatory requirements.
Real-world examples that show the pattern
Education platforms show what’s possible with the right balance. Khan Academy’s Khanmigo project is a useful case: the organisation paired pedagogical designers, engineers and safety experts to shape how an AI tutor behaves, with transparent guardrails and published guidance on responsible use (Khanmigo). That combination let them iterate publicly while addressing safety and effectiveness concerns.
Duolingo’s Duolingo Max demonstrates a similar approach on a consumer scale: product teams integrated large language models into learning features while layering user-facing transparency and content controls so learners and parents could understand how the model produced responses (Duolingo Max).
In finance, companies such as Stripe provide developer-facing compliance tooling and clear contracts that accelerate product teams’ ability to ship within regulatory bounds. The lesson is consistent: when compliance is a feature of the platform, teams can move quicker without increasing enterprise risk.
Leadership actions that actually change outcomes
- Measure compliance as product outcomes: track time-to-compliant-release and incidents caused by non-compliant design. Make these metrics part of product performance.
- Invest in platform capabilities: compliance-as-a-service — automated logging, consent libraries, audit trails — reduces the marginal cost of compliance for every team.
- Redesign governance: replace ad-hoc approvals with accredited teams and rapid escalation paths. Accreditation should come with trust and clear accountability.
- Partner with regulators early: invite regulator feedback during discovery sprints. That reduces surprises later and builds a reputation for predictable compliance.
What to avoid — and why
There are tempting but damaging shortcuts: pushing compliance entirely to central teams, over-documenting for the sake of cover, or building slow top-down committees. These approaches create a false sense of safety while eroding speed and ownership. The result is more bureaucracy, more workarounds, and ultimately a worse experience for users — the very outcome leaders say they want to prevent.
A way forward
If you lead product in a regulated context, your north star should be: safe autonomy. That means designing teams and platforms so that being compliant is the default, not an exception. Start by embedding compliance expertise into teams, invest in platform guardrails, and convert governance from a permission machine into an accreditation and oversight function.
Do that and you will free your product teams to experiment with less fear, deliver continuous value, and avoid the slow decline into bureaucratic decay. Start small: pick one team, embed a compliance specialist, introduce one automated guardrail, and measure the outcome. If it works, scale it — and watch the organisation stop protecting itself from innovation and start protecting its users instead.
Further reading: Khan Academy’s Khanmigo (https://www.khanmigo.ai/), Duolingo Max (https://blog.duolingo.com/duolingo-max/), GDPR primer (https://gdpr.eu/), Cory Doctorow on enshittification (https://pluralistic.net/2024/03/05/the-map-is-not-the-territory/).
Leave a Reply