Игроки всегда ценят удобный и стабильный доступ к играм. Для этого идеально подходит зеркало Вавады, которое позволяет обходить любые ограничения, обеспечивая доступ ко всем бонусам и слотам.

Resiliency in 2018: Q&A With BCI’s David Thorp

Organizational resiliency is a focus of the Business Continuity Institute (BCI) and executive director David Thorp. It was the theme of this year’s annual Business Continuity Awareness Week, which Risk Management Monitor covered in May, and was the focus of BCI’s updated manifesto.

We reached out to Thorp to get his insight on organizational resiliency, how businesses can improve their continuity plans and for ways to better incorporate them into their culture.

Risk Management Monitor: What companies have best demonstrated resilience?

David Thorp: A few examples of organizations that have displayed a high level of resilience are Apple, TomTom, and PostNL.

Apple displayed resilience when they reemployed Steve Jobs to reshape the company.

TomTom started by making software for Palm computers. It has dealt with a rapidly changing marketplace and over the years it has:

  • produced navigation software for PDAs (personal digital assistant)
  • produced its own navigation devices
  • developed live traffic information
  • acquired a digital mapping company
  • developed navigation software for smartphones
  • struck up deals with car manufacturers

PostNL (formerly TNT) has had to adapt to the decline in regular mail as well as tapping into the requirement to deliver more packages (outside working hours) as a result of an increase of web shops.

RMM:  What do organizations most commonly overlook in their continuity planning?

DT: Two most commonly overlooked aspects are keeping plans up to date and exercising/testing.

Business continuity management is often initiated as a project, usually assisted with external expertise. Internal personnel frequently have this role in addition to their “normal” functions. As the organization changes, these plans often get overlooked. After one or two exercises have been carried out, the focus on exercising quickly diminishes.

Unfortunately, these two aspects have a large impact on the ability to recover as planned. It could be argued that this is an indication of a lack of management commitment.

RMM: Why do so many companies overlook their continuity planning and emergency preparedness?

DT: The biggest reason is that it is not a requirement for many organizations. When not required by a regulator or a customer, the organization must:

  1. know about continuity planning and emergency preparedness
  2. understand their risk
  3. understand its value before there is a possibility of it being implemented

By not having done a risk or impact analysis, it is also easy for organizations to think that a disruptive event will not happen to them and therefore not worth the hassle and investment.

RMM: How much time and effort does creating and initiating a business continuity plan take?

DT: This depends on the size and complexity of the organization, the ambition level and the resources available. For small organizations, it is possible to create and exercise plans within a month—but this would typically take a little longer as the required people will also have other tasks. For a large and more complex organization, it may take two-to-three years to reach the desired maturity level.

RMM: What advances would you like to see the global risk management community achieve with regard to planning and preparedness?

DT: I would like to see a better understanding of each other’s disciplines and a better collaboration between them. There is much overlap between the two disciplines and with better collaboration, we can more efficiently and effectively minimize risks and improve the continuity. We are currently working on better understanding how we achieve synergy between business continuity and risk management. We see this as being a prerequisite for achieving organizational resilience. Collaboration with other disciplines is also necessary.

RMM: We’ve seen examples of reputation crises that have in some cases forced companies to close. How can organizations avoid these pitfalls?

DT: A major factor in managing the extent of the reputation damage is the quality of the crisis communication. How well and honestly you inform those affected and of course how you deal with social media makes the difference in how you are perceived. The subsequent actions need to be in line with the messages communicated.

RMM: What has changed in the BCI’s Manifesto for Organizational Resilience that risk professionals should know about?

DT: The manifesto is built on the simple premise that resilience is not the responsibility of one part of the organization—it is the responsibility of discipline within an organization working closely together toward a common purpose. Risk Management, emergency planning, disaster recovery, security, facilities management, business continuity management, supply chain management, IT management, HR management…all have an equal role to play in delivering resilience.

The manifesto contains our undertaking to seek out alliances with other professional bodies along the spectrum of what might be termed “resilience disciplines” in order to work collaboratively. This would make organizations more resilient than if we each work within our own silo.

Creating a Strong Defense and Offense in Your Risk Management Program

Stakeholders demand that companies grow, but at the same time, they expect growth to be managed to make sure the brand is not tarnished. That means enabling value as well as protecting value, which comes down to striking the appropriate balance between risk agility and risk resiliency.

For many years, risk management has focused on protecting the brand and keeping the company out of trouble. But if it’s done right, risk management is about playing not only defense but offense as well—it’s about value protection and value enablement.

Defensive Risk Management

Defensive risk management is mostly about risk resiliency, enabling a company to either prevent bad things from happening or recover more efficiently from disruption. Defensive tactics include setting up a risk appetite statement and framework that are approved by the board on down. Next, the risks should be aggregated across the enterprise and mapped against that appetite along with related risk tolerances and limits. Defensive risk management is also about developing a set of very specific key risk indicators (KRIs) to look for. This includes having a solid business continuity management strategy that will quickly get things back on track after a risk event. These activities keep the company out of harm’s way, and may be the easier part of risk management.

Offensive Risk Management

The more difficult part is thinking about risk management offensively—leveraging it for strategic advantage and growth. The first offensive tactic is to align your risk management process with strategic planning so you can drive those priorities forward in light of all the risks you are facing. That’s not an easy thing to do because even though companies may think they’re aligned, many of them actually run two very distinct and separate processes. Another offensive tactic involves giving some of the risk management activities back to the business units—so they can run faster and drive risk-adjusted decisions and revenue plans.

Risk agility lets a company flex and grow by making the risk management process adaptable to changes in the business model or to external changes affecting the company.

online pharmacy cozaar with best prices today in the USA

It is also something that has to be thought about more formally so that it does not become counterintuitive to the growth agenda, but actually supports it and even helps drive it.

If a company is being held accountable by its stakeholders to grow—and they all are—that growth has to be pursued in a controlled manner so the brand doesn’t become tarnished. That is about striking the appropriate balance between risk agility and risk resiliency—playing offense and defense.

The simple fact is that companies that use their risk management activities to play both sides are more likely to see sustainable growth and better performance patterns because they are balanced between moving the business forward and keeping the business in check.

PwC’s study 2016 Risk in review: Going the distance highlights how companies can achieve this important balance. For example, companies that structure their risk management programs to play both offense and defense are more likely to see sustainable growth and better performance patterns.

online pharmacy rogaine with best prices today in the USA

In addition, these companies are nearly as likely to report that they expect significant revenue and profit margin growth (greater than 5%) as companies that are focused only on growth—and they are better positioned for sustainable success. Such companies are balanced between having the agility to move their business forward and the resilience to prevent bad things from happening and/or recover more efficiently from disruption.

online pharmacy fluoxetine with best prices today in the USA

pwc-3

High-risk growth

Some companies with aggressive top-line growth targets decide not to invest at the appropriate levels in their risk management programs, which can allow their growth to outpace their infrastructure. Following this course can bring more risks—vulnerability peaks and risk events become more crippling to the brand. In the end, more capital is spent on investments to take risk management activities to the next level after something bad happens to the business.

The mindset across industries is that immediate growth is great, but longer term, sustainable growth is better. Companies are building up stronger and more relevant second-line (risk and compliance) functions, and holding the first line more accountable on risk because they see that will help them achieve sustainable growth.
pwc-2

Adapt or get left behind

As the business landscape continues to evolve, companies need to adapt or find themselves in deep distress. The key to creating an effective risk management program is to find the right balance that allows for growth at a comfortable pace relative to the risk appetite and risk tolerance levels set by management, and accepted by the board. When that is done, your risk management program truly becomes a strategic asset, supporting both offense and defense.