Policy is a
promise.
Governance
is the proof.
A law can change while the experience of citizens and enterprises does not. We trace the distance between formal policy and everyday practice—mapping institutions, diagnosing regulatory friction, testing reform options and strengthening the systems that make decisions accountable.
Explore governance pathways ↓→ PracticeWho is better served?
Regulatory change is not the same as reduced burden. Institutional reform matters when people can access fairer, faster and more dependable services.
Five decisions.
One delivery mandate.
No reform should begin and end with a decree. Effective governance follows a testable sequence from bottleneck, to agreement, to service redesign, to implementation, to citizen-level verification.
Who decides?
Map mandates, agencies, incentives, discretion and real service journeys.
Where is friction?
Measure procedural burden, exclusion, delays and information gaps.
What should shift?
Build viable reform options with users, officials, firms and partners.
Who owns change?
Define operating rules, digital tools, skills, budgets and accountability.
What improved?
Audit time, cost, access, compliance, uptake and unintended harms.
From institutional friction
to credible reform.
When does a regulation actually become easier to comply with?
Policy intent is not proof of improved business experience. Map the real administrative journey and ask what changes in the time, cost and uncertainty that users face.
Complex rules create hidden transaction costs.
- Multiple approvals delay legitimate business activity
- Paperwork and repeat visits burden smaller enterprises
- Performance is measured by reform completion—not user experience
A simpler, verifiable compliance journey.
- Map actual transactions and approval bottlenecks
- Test simplification and automation against service metrics
- Monitor speed, inclusion, predictability and safeguards
Can a reform reduce
the cost of getting things done?
Adjust procedural simplification, digital uptake, rework, and monthly service demand. Follow the workload from a paper-heavy baseline to an illustrative improved process.
Indicative capacity, not layoffs
Per-case administrative workload
BDT; opportunity-cost equivalent
Reformed pathway versus 2.03h baseline
Transparent model: Baseline handling = 1.50 core hours + 24% × 2.20 rework hours = 2.028 hours per case. Reformed core hours = 1.50 × (1 − 0.065 × steps removed) × (1 − 0.36 × digital uptake). Rework hours = selected rework rate × 2.20 hours. Capacity released = positive difference × monthly cases × 12; equivalent value uses an assumed BDT 650 per staff hour. These are synthetic demonstration parameters, not estimates or evaluation findings from IP3 or IFC–World Bank assignments. Legal safeguards, service quality, inclusion, digital access, displacement of burdens and transition costs are NOT modelled. Do not interpret time freed as budget savings or causal impact.
Governance lenses
Regulation, institutions, public finance, dialogue, digital systems and resilience.Public & private scenarios
Research-informed cases showing what evidence can unlock.Standard of reform
A policy is tested by delivery, user experience, fairness and accountability.Make every rule
work for people.
Better policy is not an isolated memo or an automated workflow. It is a credible agreement about who must do what, how resources and authority move, what people experience, and how the results will be checked. IP3 brings economic reasoning, institutional research and practical delivery design to that accountability challenge.