Will Business Continuity Management end up as just another area of a company that is wheeled out when there is a flood, fire or other physical disaster?
I have just read Tim Armit’s article on Continuity Central which addresses the particular issue of balancing Business Continuity Management expectations and reality, and I have to admit that it rather did smack me in the face.
Tim’s well reasoned argument cited the recent failures of our banks as a business continuity issue which lacked effective planning management as well as the recent Eurostar failures and Toyota’s media-fuelled demise, both of which don’t appear to have been subject to any business continuity planning at all.
The question I have to ask is whether or not the vision of business continuity management for the financial downfall of a national or indeed international bank is plausible as well as realistic. Tim’s view is clear:
“Last year we saw amongst others Lehmans, HBOS, Northern Rock, RBS and many others fail and either disappear or come into partial and full public ownership to keep them alive. Where were their business continuity plans? Ah now here is the rub, the Financial Services Authority and others would use many of these companies to advise them on business continuity, to hold them up as paragons of business continuity. In fact one senior BC manager from one of these companies (which no longer exists) still insists it was not a business continuity event. This horrifies me, surely a business that does not continue clearly fails in business continuity; is the clue not in the name?”
It raises rather a significant point. If the aim of business continuity managers is to plan for any kind of disruption, then surely that includes stopping a company from going into administration which effectively stops a business from trading?
Yet what Business Continuity Manager would accept a role that ultimately could leave them holding the responsibility for the success or failure of an entire company? Isn’t that what the CEO and board of directors get paid their monumentous bonuses for? If the shift of responsibility is delegated to Business continuity managers I wonder if we would have a far more worrying issue on our hands…
Whereas I agree that the role of the Business Continuity Manager is not as far reaching as it should be and managers are being sold short, I think we may be biting off more than we can chew in terms of responsibility.
What do you think? Are Business Continuity Managers actually just ‘IT and Facility managers’ as Tim suggests or is their remit wider than managing low probability physical disruptions such as flood, fire and pandemics?
