This update outlines some of the key features of our soon to be released “Agile Business Continuity Planning” software. A Platform as a Service (to be offered through AgileBCP Pty Ltd and available at http://www.agilebcp.com)
If you have had a chance to follow our story, you might recall this venture started a few months ago from a shared recognition between four of us (two “risk managers” and two “software engineers”) that helping people come through the current business impacts of the Corona Virus could be a worthy venture.
We recognised we had the experience and capabilities to develop an agile tool to help people to both reimagine their business and make it more resilient against future shocks.
Further, the offering would be easy and straightforward to use – and for small “Mom and Pop” businesses it will be made available at little or no cost.
“If I Had More Time, I Would Have Written a Shorter Letter” is oft cited – and the range of citations is interesting in itself. Today, I share a somewhat rambling reflection of being one week out from Beta testing a “Minimum Viable Product” I believe to be already good, and which will become, a terrific tool to support businesses rebooting out of the current crisis.
A dilemma faced by all of us is that this is not a “standard” business disruption. It is a “crisis” – and as noted in the International Crisis Management Standard, “crises through a combination of their novelty, inherent uncertainty and potential scale and duration of impact, are rarely resolvable through the application of predefined procedures and plans. They demand a flexible, creative, strategic and sustained response…..”
Once your objectives are clarified, it then becomes a question of “how best” to achieve them. Will you continue to rely as much as you used to on off-shore providers? What is your preferred “resource configuration”? How can you manage the capabilities of your business in ways that are agile?
These are among the questions and the opportunities we seek to support with the upcoming realease of our “Agile Business Continuity Planning” Software as a Service (SaaS).
The adapted (Plan-Do-Check-Act) diagram above reflects the iterative and cyclic relationships between dynamic decision making and the execution of action plans – key processes and outcomes supported by the tool.
I love how people start their posts with “I’m excited to …”
People who know me know that I am fairly “unexcitable” – but trust me, I am excited.
Let me share where we are up to. This week, our Partnership Board meeting approved moving our upcoming Software as a Service (SaaS) to Beta testing next week.
We have targetted trusted colleagues to support us in this. There are three key differentiators in our approach – some are around simplicity and others are around improved practice.
The first “hook” (don’t you just love marketing jargon) is a respectful understanding that most people in a crisis bring together a team of bright and enthusiastic individuals who too often “flap about”. We will be empowering them with “structure” – a great process and straightforward tool.
It has been recognised for nearly five decades that disaster risk is a function of hazard and vulnerability.
Our efforts have focused on supporting those at risk to be more resilient – more prepared.
This focus – I suggest – has failed to adequately map the broader, more holistic nature of risk and in so doing, we have missed opportunities to change the very interaction of hazards and communities at risk. (Here I use the term “community” to be any group with a shared association – for most people this may generally be perceived as being spatial, geographic; but it equally might be economic, social or cultural associations.)
Even if we only explore the spatial aspects of the “hazard community interface” – which are usefully readily mapped and visualised (and hence communicated) – we can see a history of neglect, if not negligence. In the “real world” of wealth and power, a “short termism” – either seeking or supporting economic returns on investment – has given us a legacy of narrow policy approaches and compromising land use decisions across a range of scales (from single sites to extensive settlements).
Ready illustrations where visualisation enhances understanding can be found with ‘fire’ and ‘water’.
Flooding (somewhat bemusedly viewed as ‘water out of place’) is set to be out of place in increasingly more places. From coastal settings subject to sea rise and more intense, if not also more frequent extreme weather events – to urban subdivisions poorly sited and under ‘runoff pressure’ from increasingly sealed catchments.
Bushfires continue to expose development which has not been strategically informed – and is too often compounded by inadequate design.
Current reactive approaches rely on governments constitutionally responsible for life and property focusing on promulgating preparedness – ‘watch and go’ – life before property.
A logical last resort. However last resorts ought not necessarily be best practices.
Management processes should always be as simple as possible – yet as complex as is necessary.
First, clear, understandable, straightforward risk statements come out of mindful conversations about context.
Second, we assess risks – not as an academic exercise – but in order to determine whether we need to do anything about those risks. So it’s important to do that both rigorously and consistently – with strong criteria based decision making processes.
Third, effective risk treatments are also best determined by applying rigorous, consistent criteria.
To support the quality of your risk management process our Macro-enabled Excel Workbook – is available as an immediate download – at http://bit.ly/IdentifyAssessTreat
Customized OughtWe app
Before buying see YourOughtWe.com
Pre order for November 2021
Disclaimer: This website is provided for general information and as such, should not be relied upon for any particular matter. John Salter provides this information as a general reference source only and has taken all reasonable measures to ensure that the material contained on this site is as accurate as possible at the time of publication. However, John Salter makes no representation and gives no warranty about the accuracy, reliability, completeness or suitability for any particular purpose of the information. To the full extent that he is able to do so in law, John Salter disclaims all liability, (including liability in negligence), for losses and damages, (including indirect and consequential loss and damage), caused by or arising from anyone using or relying on the information for any purpose whatsoever.