The BIA’s Fatal Flaws
The goal of a traditional BIA is sound in theory—to identify and prioritize the business’ critical processes relative to the losses that would result from their interruption. However, in practice, this process repeatedly fails to produce the desired results and in virtually every instance we have seen, delays and complicates the recovery planning process.
Read More…
Download
Infusing Pragmatism – The Risk Analysis
How can company after company work for decades to establish their disaster recovery program and still never test their critical applications end-to-end? And how can it take years to create departmental business continuity plans to document work procedures that are performed every single day? Clearly, it can’t be for a lack of procedure…
Read More…
Download
6 Differences of Pandemic Planning
At a summary level, planning for a pandemic typically requires six aspects of preparedness… each very different from traditional DR/BC.
Read More…
Download
Should you Buy an Automated Planning Tool?
The question is often asked, and the answer is always “It depends…”
Read More…
Download
A Case for All-Risk Incident Management
As global business practices, national and international financial challenges, constantly increasing competition, industry consolidation and the constant chase for improved profitability raise the bar for today’s continuity programs by generating new requirements for much higher levels of availability, recoverability and operability—they also stretch the bar for the nature and scope of covered events.
Read More…
Download
A New Perspective on Testing
The disaster recovery and business continuity industry’s mantra is “Test… Test… Test! And when you’re done, test some more!” There is another parallel theme that says, “There is no such thing as a failed test.” – Philosophically, we disagree with both of these self-fulfilling prophecies.
Read More…
Download