Or are they mutually exclusive? Is the concept of “resiliency” the framework within which an effective business continuity plan is constructed? If not, it should be. If not, the Business Continuity Plan (BCP) isn’t worth the electrons that store it within the system.
RESILIENCE is defined by Merriman-Webster as follows:
“The capability of a strained body to recover its size and shape after deformation caused especially by compressive stress,”and “an ability to recover from or adjust EASILY to misfortune or change.”
Both definitions address the ability of the main body to adjust and adapt to external forces that are exerted in a non-complementary fashion. In other words, unannounced disruptions to the status quo. Moreover, the emphasis is on the ease by with that adaptation is realized.
Much has been said regarding “Organizational Resiliency” and the need for the Business Continuity Plan to achieve that end. One can almost hear the mantra chorused by senior management when the notion of “organizational resiliency” is challenged by vested stakeholders: “….of course we are resilient….We have a Plan!”
But are they? Upon further review…
It may be interpreted that true “resiliency”, in the context of responses to external stresses, has two distinct components:
1. The BCP
2. The Organization
The glue that hold these two key resiliency elements in the proper tension is the ability, capability and will of the people within the organization to seamlessly respond to external organizational stimuli that results in unanticipated “misfortune or change” to key processes, infrastructure or capabilities.
It is certainly one thing to “brace for shock” when a threat is anticipated and known. People prepare. Management focuses more tightly on risk mitigation. Redundancy, perhaps rarely (or never) relied upon, is “given the warning” to step into action on moment’s notice. The probability of an effective response with the associated positive outcome is certainly “Good.” With a little training in between those odds may go to “Excellent.” Great.
It is all together different when the “misfortune or change” is more akin to the “bolt from the blue.” In this scenario, it is a “come as you are party” and, hopefully, the party preparations included a heavy dosage of organizational socialization, training, and testing of the BCP. In the average organization, what are the odds of the perfect nexus of these elements? Add the “surprise” element and we have the recipe for, at best, a “failed response.” Not Good.
In both scenarios, both organizations could have made the rhetorical claim (or claims if extraordinarily confident) before the event that they were, in fact, “resilient.” In fact, neither would meet the true litmus test or resiliency: “ An ability to recover from or adjust EASILY to misfortune or change.” The “ramp up” in the “brace for shock” scenario comes at a cost both in terms of time and the illusion of preparation. In this case, any deviation from the set plan serves as the prologue to failure. In the “bolt from the blue scenario, the notion of “adjusting easily to misfortune or change” was doomed to failure at first contact.
As stated earlier, the factors that empower an organization’s true resiliency are the ability, capability and will of the people within the organization. The challenge for senior leadership (note the term “leadership” used vice “management”. “Will” cannot be managed in the clinical sense however leadership inspires individuals from within, hence “will” is re-enforced) is to allow the growth of ability, development of capability and engendering the sense of empowerment amongst all echelons of the organizational structure to ACT as leadership expects them to act in the absence of direct supervision. The early stages of an event that “causes misfortune or change” are the most critical. The right actions taken at the right time by the people who have the opportunity to do so can only happen if they are trained (ability and capability) and empowered. This, in the final analysis, is Resiliency.
A page from history exemplifies this last point quite clearly. During the Second Battle of Guadalcanal in 1942, the light cruiser USS San Francisco (CA 38) suffered over 32 major caliber hits during an intense night action with significantly superior Japanese forces. With senior leadership killed, a severely compromised propulsion plant, “next to nothing” for electrical generation and on the verge of sinking, the ship continued to put “rounds down range” to the enemy. They continued to “fight another day.” Under these extraordinary circumstances, the crew of that ship demonstrated extraordinary “Resiliency.” Inspired leadership instilled the will to perform and training, on the part of every crewmember, to the tenets of their “contingency plan”, empowered them to prevail. They were, in every sense of the definition, RESILIENT.
By: John Kunert, Senior Planner @ Circumspex LLC
Comments