In the aftermath of the publication of the British Parliamentary Banking Standards Commission Final Report, critical questions have been raised in relation to professional standards, obligation and awareness across the sector. Although Australia did not suffer a single calamitous collapse, it is not immune to global eddies questioning the form and purpose of regulation. The emphasis on the professions as gatekeepers animates the contested strategy of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission. In the legal space, the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner has long emphasized the critical importance of creating and monitoring commitment to a hierarchy of duties for listed legal firms: to the court, the client and the shareholder. The OLSC has more importantly emphasized the need for a proactive regulatory regime that does not focus on compliance but rather on building integrity through the development of an ethical infrastructure. At a broader level, the challenges posed by the Future of Financial Advice process raise critical questions about how to balance standards and obligation, issues firmly within the purview of both ASIC and the Professional Standards Council. The imminent retirement of Steve Mark, the inaugural New South Wales Legal Services Commissioner, provides an opportunity to reflect on the theory and practice of regulation, with particular reference to the role played by the professions or those who aspire to that status. Among the critical questions to be addressed in this interactive workshop are what should the purpose of regulation be and how should that be articulated, negotiated and legitimated? What constitutes professional obligation and can this be linked explicitly to a common understanding of regulatory purpose? If so, how? What form should regulatory engagement take? What design principles should be followed? How does one measure the performance of both the regulator and the regulated?