|
Executive Summary
Human Concerns and Continuity Planning
By Don Saracco, Ed D
Human concerns in the field of disaster planning,
response and recovery are double edged. As people, we care about the
lives and safety of others and want to plan and prepare accordingly.
As owners and managers of organizations, we must also recognize the threats
that people bring and must again plan and prepare accordingly. In this
age of growing dependence on technology, as well as increasing distribution
of authority, managers must find the crucial balance between control and
freedom that is necessary for both care and diligence. Human concerns
range from basic protection of lives and safety to broad community involvement
and include employee preparedness on and off the job, appropriate hiring
practices, workplace violence prevention, employee involvement in continuity
assurance and the organization barriers that challenge continuity planning
professionals.
Every one of the many executives with whom we have
talked tells us that the number one disaster response priority for their
organization is life safety. Even if regulatory pressures and safety
guidelines did not compel them, they would ensure that employees' lives
were protected. Yet there appears to be little connection between human
concerns and continuity planning. A recent industry benchmark survey
showed that more than eighty-five percent of companies cited a reason
other than life safety for developing business continuity plans. The
same study revealed that fully seventy percent of respondents do not think
that the employees in their organizations get sufficient disaster recovery/business
continuity training. It appears that laudable concern for people is more
intention than practice among organization leaders.
There is no lack of evidence that employees are at
risk along with their organizations. According to reports from the US
Departments of Justice and Labor, homicide is the leading cause of death
for women in the workplace and the second leading cause for men. Homicide
accounts for seventeen percent of all occupational fatalities and forty
percent of all female deaths. In addition, assaults occurring in the
workplace cost nearly half a million employees 1,751,100 days of work
each year, an average of 3.5 days per incident. This missed work resulted
in over $55,000,000 in lost wages annually, not including days covered
by sick and annual leave. If the direct victims of violence are key personnel,
the effects of the event ripple across the organization as negative impacts
on the performance of others who depend upon them for leadership or expertise.
More than seventy percent of the organizations in
the industry benchmark study reported that their tolerance for downtime
is less than twenty-four hours. These organizations are not able to recover
if their people are unavailable and concern for family and home safety
and security are prominent limiters of availability. During the 1994
Northridge Earthquake, many people were unable to report to work because
the security of their dwelling was compromised by damage and needed attention.
While this may seem to be outside the scope of business continuity planning,
at least one firm we know subsidizes mitigation efforts by employees to
improve the chances that they will be able to get to work more quickly.
While still rare, "external" planning of this sort is growing,
and may become the norm as tolerance for downtime continues to shrink.
In more than fifty communities across the country
Disaster Recovery Business Alliances and other community groups have been
formed to share knowledge and resources among organizations and to support
the mitigation of infrastructure and lifeline elements upon which businesses
and their employees commonly depend. While few organizations will subsidize
home mitigation, a minimum level of support for employees should include
home preparation and planning guidelines, tips and encouragement. A research
study in 1999 showed that employees think that employers are obliged to
assist with family support and want to be involved in planning.
Human concerns often become too much of a "given"
for organization leaders. Of course they care and of course they will
do everything possible to respond to catastrophic events with resources
and personal energy. What is hard to do is convince them that the most
effective way to express their commitment is through comprehensive planning
and preparation. Lack of executive awareness leads many managers to favor
heroic response over prudent planning in addressing human concerns. The
reduced risk of litigation alone can spell the difference between profitability
and mere survival. The facts speak for themselves. The best protection
for employees and their organizations is found in policies, practices
and systems that incorporate business continuity awareness on a day-to-day
basis. Every manager and professional should be encouraged and expected
to ask, "How can we make this system or process so bulletproof that
recovery is not necessary?" and rewarded for devising solid answers
to the question. Awareness of this kind among all employees will result
in more robust organizations that are inherently safer and better places
to work. Organization owners and managers are good people with the right
intentions. With the right awareness and commitment, they can create
just such workplaces.
About the Author
Don Saracco, Ed.D. is EVP and Chief Operating
Officer of MLC & Associates, Inc. He has over 25 years experience
in organizational development and business continuity program development.
He welcomes comments and/or questions directed to dsarac@mlc2resq.com.
|
