In our haste to cover all the high-level strategies that may be needed to respond to a business disruption, Business Continuity Plans often miss critical details that can mean the difference between success and failure – especially when time is a major factor.
Many BCP’s have a strategy for “Loss of Building”. That strategy may include moving critical employees from the most crucial business processes to alternate sites – either internal (another of the organization’s facilities in a different geographical location) or external (at a 3rd party “Workspace” that can be made ready to accommodate those employee’s technology requirements).
All good; and logical – but perhaps missing some critical information.
What will those relocated employees need to know when they arrive at that alternate location?
A major North American financial institution contracted with a well-known provider of emergency workspace to accommodate their alternate location strategies. During the first test of that strategy, the exercise participants arrived at the alternate site – only to be denied admittance. No one had considered what those participants would need to prove they should be allowed to enter. Nor did their BCP tell them who to contact if they had a problem. Those participants sat in the lobby of the ‘workspace’ for more than an hour until their authentication could be straightened out.
Luckily, it was only a test. In a real disruption that lost hour could have meant the difference between meeting and missing an RTO.
Even when an Alternate Site plan calls for using an internal location, there are coordination logistics that should be planned – and documented – in advance. Relocation plans must be documented and coordinated at both ends – among those being relocated and whoever is responsible for their seating at the alternate site.
This is especially critical when relocated employees are to displace employees from less critical business processes. Until seats have been vacated there may be no place for those incoming employees to work. The coordination of movements must be well documented in the plans of those relocating and those receiving them. Communication is crucial. Time wasted on logistics can seriously impact the ability to meet recovery objectives.
Even when the logistical coordination has been well documented, testing those logistics will help find any gaps or flaws in the plans. A ‘tabletop’ test of relocation is essential; and all personnel involved must be aware of their responsibilities. A walk-thru of the relocation process can help assure that everything will work smoothly if the Plan is ever invoked. But you can’t ‘set it and forget it’. Seating, personnel and business priority changes will all potentially impact those relocation plans. Test repeatedly to find newly created gaps and update the plans accordingly.
The adage “the devil is in the details” certainly applies to Alternate Site logistics. Flawed or untested details may be the difference between success and chaos.
