Study finds that many US government, business, and nonprofit organizations are ill-prepared for crisis

New York University’s (NYU) Center for Catastrophe Preparedness and Response (CCPR) and The Public Entity Risk Institute (PERI), a nonprofit research institute focused on risk management training and education, have completed a study on the level of crisis readiness among government, business, and nonprofit organizations across the United States. The findings reveal a large number of organizations lack effective preparedness programs to respond to and recover from a crisis despite estimates that crises to come may be more frequent and complex.

In the report, ‘Predicting Organizational Crisis Readiness: Perspectives and Practices toward a Pathway to Preparedness’, author Paul C. Light, the Paulette Goddard Professor for Public Service at NYU’s Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service and the principal investigator of The Project on Organizational and Community Preparedness at CCPR, points to a broadly held belief that there is direct relationship between population and hazards such that as population increases, the number of hazards proportionately increases.

“Consequently,” writes Dr. Light, “the crises ahead are increasing both in complexity and frequency; yet, levels of crises readiness among organizations remains low and poorly understood.”

In the report, Dr. Light, author of a new book on government reform titled, ‘A Government Ill Executed’ (Harvard University Press) examines characteristics that better position organizations and government to recover after a crisis, identifying those that serve as significant predictors of crisis readiness. He also presents recommendations for enhancing organizational preparedness. The report includes the results of a survey of opinion leaders from government, for-profit, and non-profit sectors comparing crisis characteristics of organizations.

Among the key recommendations are:

* Priorities: crisis readiness should be given the same organizational priority as other mission-centered activities, such as fund-raising and sales, marketing, branding, and measurement.
* Budgeting: crisis readiness should be given an identifiable line in the organizational budget and it should not be subsumed in another budget.
* Accountability: crisis readiness should be given clear grants of authority from the leadership and board.
* Stafford Act Reform: raise the limits of support, and decease the barriers for application, for small businesses in the aftermath of a disaster.
* Regulation: set voluntary standards for crisis readiness through statues and award programs.

“I commend NYU and Dr. Paul Light for recognizing the need to research ways to improve our nation’s disaster preparedness and crisis recovery abilities,” said Rep. Peter King (R-NY), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Homeland Security. “This report demonstrates that disaster preparedness is not just a role for the federal government. This is an area in which the private and public sectors must become more engaged, so that we can work together to be as resilient as possible to any kind of catastrophe.”

Predicting Organizational Crisis Readiness: Perspectives and Practices toward a Pathway to Preparedness is available for download at no charge at https://www.riskinstitute.org/peri/images/file/POCR-finalreport.pdf

•Date: 21st August 2008• Region: US •Type: Article •Topic: Crisis management
Rate this article or make a comment - click here