Last week, I turned down yet another AI policy analyst role. Great company, fascinating work, but the pay simply couldn't compete. It was the fourth time I'd steered a candidate away from public sector AI governance toward a private role. But I genuinely felt torn about it.
This pattern keeps playing out across my desk: talented specialists caught between meaningful public work and lucrative private sector positions. And the gap is widening.
The AI Policy Boom Isn't Slowing Down
We're halfway through 2026, and the demand for AI policy specialists hasn't just grown, it's exploded. The AI regulations that seemed like distant threats in 2024 are now operational reality, driving a feeding frenzy for talent who can actually interpret them.
I'm seeing two distinct career paths emerging: the public sector route (DSIT, ICO, CMA) versus private sector (tech firms, consultancies, and increasingly, financial services). Each comes with its own set of trade-offs that nobody seems to discuss honestly.
Public Sector: Where the Rules Are Actually Written
The government path deserves more credit than it gets.
DSIT has become the unexpected powerhouse in UK AI policy. The AI Security Institute (rebranded from AI Safety Institute in February 2025) has grown substantially and continues to recruit, with its remit now focused on serious security risks from advanced AI rather than the broader safety brief it launched with. The scope has expanded dramatically beyond just frontier model evaluation, they're now setting standards that ripple through every industry application.
I placed an ML engineer there in February who specifically wanted to shift into policy work. The attraction? Being at the table where decisions actually happen, rather than just responding to them.
The Competition and Markets Authority is another major player, with their algorithm team examining AI market concentration issues. They've built out a surprisingly technical team, they're not just hiring policy wonks but people who can genuinely understand model architectures.
The ICO might be the most interesting place right now. They've been given substantial new powers under the latest data protection framework, and they're hiring specialists who can investigate AI systems for compliance. The work involves both technical understanding and regulatory judgment.
Private Sector: Following the Money
The private sector is where the salary action is.
The big tech firms are obvious players. Google, Microsoft, and Amazon have all expanded their UK policy teams substantially. What's interesting is that they're not just hiring traditional policy people, they want ML engineers who can translate between technical realities and regulatory requirements.
Financial services firms are the surprising entrants. Banks like Barclays and HSBC have built dedicated AI governance teams focused on model risk, fairness, and regulatory compliance. Insurance companies too, they're desperate for people who understand both the algorithms and the evolving regulatory landscape.
Consultancies are probably the hungriest of all. The Big Four have scaled up their AI policy practices dramatically, and boutique firms specializing in AI governance have appeared from nowhere. They're billing out AI policy specialists at eye-watering day rates.
Beyond Tick Boxes: Diversity Recruitment Strategies That Actually Transform UK Workplaces
Master the Virtual Hot Seat: 7 Video Interview Techniques Recruiters Don't Tell You
How to Master 'Tell Me About Yourself' Interview Question: UK Expert Insights
The Trade-offs Nobody Talks About
The Money Question
The pay gap is substantial.
Public sector AI policy roles typically range from £55k-85k, depending on seniority. There are exceptions for specialist roles at places like the AI Safety Institute, which can stretch to £95k for technical leadership positions.
Private sector? I'm regularly placing mid-level AI policy specialists at £90k-120k. Senior roles at tech giants or financial institutions can command £130k-160k, plus equity or bonuses.
I've watched candidates agonize over this difference. For some, especially those with families or London mortgages, the choice feels made for them.
Impact vs Influence
The nature of the work differs fundamentally.
In government roles, you're crafting the actual rules. Your work has direct impact on how AI is governed across the entire country. You're involved earlier in the process, with greater potential for systemic change.
Private sector roles are more about navigating and influencing those rules. You help your organization comply, find competitive advantages, and shape industry responses to regulatory proposals.
Which matters more? That depends entirely on your temperament.
What The Hiring Process Reveals
The interview processes tell you everything about these different worlds.
Government roles focus heavily on policy understanding, stakeholder management, and your ability to translate complex technical concepts for non-specialists. The processes can be slow and bureaucratic, I had one candidate wait 11 weeks between final interview and offer.
Private sector interviews tend to test commercial awareness alongside policy knowledge. They want to know: can you turn regulatory requirements into competitive advantage? Can you predict regulatory trends before they happen?
They're also much faster, I placed a candidate at a fintech firm within two weeks from application to signed contract.
The Career Progression Question
This is where things get interesting. Government experience opens doors to senior private sector roles later. Having "former DSIT" or "ex-ICO" on your CV carries serious weight when companies need regulatory credibility.
But I've rarely seen movement in the opposite direction. Once you're in the private sector earning six figures, the pay cut to move into government can feel impossible to justify.
The career move that works: start in government, build your network and credibility, then transition to private sector for the payday.
So Which Path Should You Choose?
There's no single right answer. It depends entirely on your priorities.
If you care about systemic change and can tolerate bureaucracy and lower compensation, government roles offer unparalleled impact. You're setting the rules of the game, not just playing it.
If you want faster pace, higher pay, and more resources, private sector is the obvious choice. But recognize you'll be one step removed from the actual policymaking.
What I tell most candidates: the sweet spot might be starting in government to build credibility, then leveraging that experience for a senior private sector role 3-4 years later.
The one thing I can promise: regardless of which path you choose, demand for AI policy expertise isn't going anywhere. We're still in the early chapters of AI regulation, and both sectors will be hiring aggressively for years to come.
The real opportunity may be bridging both paths rather than choosing between them.
That's a question for another column.
Want to explore AI policy career opportunities? Browse AI policy jobs on The OHub or check out what the government is currently recruiting for on Civil Service Jobs.
