Not just Surviving – THRIVING!
Posted: May 17, 2013 Filed under: business, business continuity, Business Continuity Plan, business management, business systems, businessimpactanalysis, corporate culture, disaster recovery, emergency management, exercise, human resources, information systems, operational risk, resilience, resources, risk management, survival | Tags: Business, Business Continuity, Business continuity planning, Business Services, chaos, continuity, disaster, Disaster recovery, Emergency management, Fire and Security, Supply chain, Survival Leave a comment
Continuity management has long been tied to disaster planning and crisis response as fundamental to emergency planning but the reality is: If you’re just practicing business continuity to survive you’re never going to get much out of it.
The key to effective value creation from continuity management is a strategy that builds on how the day-to-day business is designed to create value. Today’s global market puts us all in crisis. Corporate directors are in jail. Cyber terrorists can easily hide across borders around world yet still access information kept locked away. States and countries declare bankruptcy. Instability is everywhere.
Businesses are so interdependent on one another that supply chain and technology are complex grey zones of value and accountability. The bottom line is the business needs to create value to survive. Maybe value means money, maybe it’s customer satisfaction or maybe it’s serving its nonprofit goal. Regardless, the creation of that value must be the crux of your resilience plans.
One of the most common misconceptions of business continuity planning is that it starts with a disaster and in a lucky world no one would need a plan. Luck favors the prepared. A business with a healthy continuity management program doesn’t just survive crisis; it thrives daily. The reality of the business world is that every day is more complex and risk loaded. In order to work toward corporate maturity and institutionalization of the systems that create value you have to structure and live your plan.
DCSPlanning Delicious Tagging
Posted: November 27, 2012 Filed under: business, business continuity, business systems, businessimpactanalysis, corporate culture, disaster recovery, emergency management, fraud, human resources, neurology, neuropsychology, operational risk, resilience, resources, risk management, survival | Tags: Delicious, disaster, Facebook, Pinterest, resources, tagging, Twitter, United States 1 Comment
English: Red Pinterest logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Per our name change we’ve got a new Delicious tagging site with LOTS of fantastic resources. In case you’re not sure what Delicious is, it’s just like Pinterest but we use it strictly for professional disaster and compliance related resources. Please check it out and follow us!
Nine ways to Recognize a Good BCPlan
Posted: November 27, 2012 Filed under: business, business continuity, business systems, businessimpactanalysis, corporate culture, disaster recovery, emergency management, operational risk, resilience, resources, risk management Leave a commentHere’s a good assessment of 9 ways to Recognize a good BCPlan. Enjoy
There are all sorts of templates and thoughts on how the various Business Continuity Management (BCM) program components should look – the “plans.” Every organization has its own self-styled plan; every consulting agency has its own look and feel and every available free online template looks different from the next. So how can you recognize a good plan from a really bad and confusing plan?
The following 10 considerations will help you determine if you’ve got a good plan or a not-so-good plan
- Action Oriented: If people are expected to follow and execute plan activities, it must be action oriented. A document full of theory and suggestions won’t be of any help and will quickly be used to stop a desk from wobbling – or used to capture excess dust that may collect on a shelf. As a rule of thumb, I tend to look for the first action step/item/activity within the first 5 pages after…
View original post 1,247 more words
Notable statements from the 2011-2012 KPMG Global BCM Program Benchmarking Study
Posted: May 23, 2012 Filed under: business, business systems, businessimpactanalysis Leave a comment- The fact that 31% of respondents felt they had met their RTO during a disruption, when 85%
are using exercises, indicates there is room to improve the quality of exercises. ~ED Mately,
Director, Advisory Services, KPMG LLP - It is interesting that reputation as a program driver has increased from 14% to 40% in the last
four years. I believe this is the direct result of the pervasiveness of social media & its impact on
public perception. - Almost 85% of the respondents state that their business continuity program is primarily
implemented for continuity of operations, which emphasizes the acknowledgement of
corporate responsibility and ownership to institutionalize this continuity into business
portfolios. - It appears that the business continuity function is getting better defined, is reporting at a higher
level and functional substantiation is based on value to the business. If we want to raise the
profile of BCM and get executive-level buy-in, then we need to measure the value contribution
of BCM programs not just program performance. - Many organizations’ IT recovery strategies are undergoing change, namely internal software
and hardware solutions (43%), combination internal and external solutions (36%), and external
hardware and software solutions (23%). On average, 3.8% of IT budgets go to disaster recovery
capabilities. - An organization’s reputation can be ruined in minutes if not handled appropriately. That is why
it is essential to have social media plans incorporated as part of an overall crisis management
response. - Executive sponsorship, funding and other metrics are important considerations for all
organizations. One way we can further develop BCM programs is to increase collaboration
across all industries.
