|
 What needs to be considered in post-pandemic plans? David Honour opens the debate...
A paper which will be published in the next issue of the Business Continuity Journal (available on 22nd September) highlights a significant gap in current pandemic planning guidance. ‘Preparedness For A Flu Pandemic In Europe: Gaps In Advice’ by Alexandra Conseil and Dr. Richard Coker, of the Department of Public Health Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, presents a gap analysis of European pandemic planning guidance. It concludes, amongst other things, that post-pandemic recovery planning is an area which almost all pandemic planning guidance has failed to address. The paper’s authors believe that post-pandemic recovery planning is of vital importance, stating that “There is an urgent need to encourage organizations to prepare for their recovery and this area should be addressed in all organizational guidance.”
The above research leads to a question which was beyond the scope of the paper: has lack of guidance meant that post-pandemic recovery planning is generally being ignored in pandemic plans? A Google search indicates that this might be the case. A search for the specific key phrase "post-pandemic planning" returned just ten pages. “Post pandemic planning” returned 141 pages; “post-pandemic plan” and “post pandemic plan” gave just 3 pages each.
Why is post-pandemic planning important?
1) If pandemic planning focuses solely on the pandemic period, then the organization will be prepared for the well-documented business continuity threats that will be engendered. It will survive. But what of the post-pandemic threats? How long will it take for critical infrastructure to return to business-as-usual? Will long term national security be compromised? Will travel be restricted for an extended period? What new legislation and regulations can we anticipate? How will the political risk map change? How will the businesses’ markets change in the long term? If no thought is given to these areas then the organization’s post-pandemic survival may be very short term.
For some these questions may sit outside the realm of business continuity management; but they are in fact core business resiliency questions which need to be asked and addressed.
2) Pragmatically, a key consideration for post-pandemic business continuity is succession planning. Organizations need to take a cold, hard, look at the expected mortality rates and the impact that this could have on staffing levels. How will general staff shortfalls be handled? How will senior management losses be filled? The job-market for experienced staff may become very constricted, with well-qualified people being in much greater demand post-pandemic, as organizations compete to fill mission-critical vacancies. What internal training and progression processes can be put in place now to ensure that critical positions have a better chance of being filled by internal promotion post-pandemic? What knowledge management processes need to be implemented to ensure that critical information is not lost?
3) The aim of business continuity management is to enable an organization to emerge from a period of disruption in as healthy a state as it was prior to the event. This is certainly the case for small-scale ‘day to day’ disruptions. However, when it comes to a major wide-area and long-lasting period of disruption, such as that which would be caused by a pandemic, it can be argued that the ultimate aim of BCM is to enable an organization to emerge in an even more competitive position than it had before the incident. During a pandemic, many businesses will fail. The ones that survive will be able to fill the gaps left by these failed businesses. Therefore, another reason that post-pandemic planning is important is one of competitive advantage: plans need to be in place as to how the organization will capitalize on the situation. Should it prepare acquisition funds NOW to use in a post-pandemic market? Should it put aside cash NOW for expansion projects in a post-pandemic world?
The above three areas are just an attempt to start a discussion about this subject. Continuity Central would very much welcome your input in this area. Is post-pandemic planning outside the realm of BCM? What thought has your organization given to post-pandemic recovery planning? What other areas should be added to the above list? Make a comment.
Author: David Honour is editor ofContinuity Central.
Prolonged recovery was recognised as a distinct and critical phase in my original 2005 paper on the effect of pandemics on banking, as the last phase in what has become known as the 'circus tent' model: see
http://www.continuitycentral.com/feature0257.htm
It is depressing that the industry is only now getting around to thinking seriously about this critical phase.
I agree with your analysis and support your attempt to get people thinking.
I remain convinced that it is a key to the long term survival of companies AND that some firms will not make it.
In addition to surviving staff being in great demand I believe the problem will be even greater because history shows us that after a major life incident peoples' priorities change, many managers and staff will just not want to return to the rat race, especially having become somewhat self sufficient during the event.
Unfortunately I don't believe additional training upfront, while a good goal in itself, will get over the emotional hurdle when/if the pandemic happens.
Consider for a moment after the event, what will the surviving staff think about the firm - where they there for me, did they do everything for me, my family and my colleagues to help us through the event? If not trust will be broken and they will walk.
This argues VERY strongly for good pandemic planning because surviving staff will then see that the firm cared about both their short term welfare and long term security.
Communication of intent will be critical and bad practices, such as the board looking after itself first for anti-virals, will be detrimental.
One question, (in addition to will it work?) continuity planners should ask themselves when looking at each part of the plan is: "Six months after the event, how will these actions be perceived by our staff, our customers, our suppliers and the public in general? Self serving and short term, or generous and strategic?"
Keep up the good efforts.
Pat McConnell
•Date: 19th Sept 2008• Region: World •Type: Article •Topic: Pandemic planning
Rate this article or make a comment - click here
UPDATED 25TH SEPTEMBER |
