EPCB Risk Management Services

When Hazard meets Vulnerability - geographic and social

2016-06-07T16:42:00.000+09:30

Sometimes the interface of hazard and vulnerability is straightforward - physical - in geographic space. Other risks - interfaces of hazards and vulnerabilities are not straightforward - they happen in social space. And other times - they overlay each other and call for complex, mindful management.

Risk is a function of hazard and vulnerability

What is the essence of a "duty of care"?

2014-01-14T17:04:00.000+10:30

Due care. Due diligence. Duty of care.

We hear these terms bandied about.

What do they mean?

What do they have in common?

An interesting insight is gained by looking at what people ask after an incident or a disaster. Especially the questions asked by courts and coronial enquiries.

The key - and complex question is - "what ought you to have KNOWN and DONE, about the RISKS and THEIR MANAGEMENT'?

Good question.
Conversation prompt - Is the key question (what ought you to have known and done about risks and their management) a fair question?

PS We think the resources available on and from our website www.disasterresilience.com will help you.

RePosting a classic - how to write well.

2013-03-10T00:42:00.001+10:30

MADMAN, ARCHITECT, CARPENTER, JUDGE: ROLES AND THE WRITING PROCESS
by Betty S. Flowers
Professor of English and
Director of the Lyndon B. Johnson Presidential Library

"What's the hardest part of writing?" I ask on the first day of class.

"Getting started," someone offers, groaning.

"No, it's not getting started," a voice in the back of the room corrects. "It's keeping on once you do get started. I can always write a sentence or two-but then I get stuck."

"Why?" I ask.

"I don't know. I am writing along, and all of a sudden I realize how awful it is, and I tear it up. Then I start over again, and after two sentences, the same thing happens."

"Let me suggest something which might help," I say. Turning to the board, I write four words: "madman," "architect," "carpenter," "judge."

Then I explain:

"What happens when you get stuck is that two competing energies are locked horn to horn, pushing against each other. One is the energy of what I'll call your 'madman.' He is full of ideas, writes crazily and perhaps rather sloppily, gets carried away by enthusiasm or anger, and if really let loose, could turn out ten pages an hour.

"The second is a kind of critical energy-what I'll call the 'judge.' He's been educated and knows a sentence fragment when he sees one. He peers over your shoulder and says, 'That's trash!' with such
authority that the madman loses his crazy confidence and shrivels up. You know the judge is right-after all, he speaks with the voice of your most imperious English teacher. But for all his sharpness of eye, he can't create anything.

"So you're stuck. Every time your madman starts to write, your judge pounces on him.

"Of course this is to over-dramatize the writing process-but not entirely. Writing is so complex, involves so many skills of heart, mind and eye, that sitting down to a fresh sheet of paper can sometime seem
like 'the hardest work among those not impossible,' as Yeats put it.

Whatever joy there is in the writing process can come only when the energies are flowing freely-when you're not stuck.

"And the trick to not getting stuck involves separating the energies. If you let the judge with his intimidating carping come too close to the madman and his playful, creative energies, the ideas which
form the basis for your writing will never have a chance to surface. But you can't simply throw out the judge. The subjective personal outpourings of your madman must be balanced by the objective, impersonal vision of the educated critic within you. Writing is not just self-expression; it is communication as well.

"So start by promising your judge that you'll get around to asking his opinion, but not now. And then let the madman energy flow. Find what interests you in the topic, the question or emotion that it raises in you, and respond as you might to a friend-or an enemy. Talk on paper, page after page, and don't stop to judge or correct sentences. Then, after a set amount of time, perhaps, stop and gather the paper up and wait a day.

"The next morning, ask your 'architect' to enter. She will read the wild scribblings saved from the night before and pick out maybe a tenth of the jottings as relevant or interesting. (You can see immediately
that the architect is not sentimental about what the madman wrote; she is not going to save every crumb for posterity.) Her job is simply to select large chunks of material and to arrange them in a pattern that might form an argument. The thinking here is large, organizational, paragraph level thinking-the architect doesn't worry about sentence structure.

"No, the sentence structure is left for the 'carpenter' who enters after the essay has been hewn into large chunks of related ideas. The carpenter nails these ideas together in a logical sequence, making sure each sentence is clearly written, contributes to the argument of the paragraph, and leads logically and gracefully to the next sentence. When the carpenter finishes, the essay should be smooth and watertight.

"And then the judge comes around to inspect. Punctuation, spelling, grammar, tone-all the details which result in a polished essay become important only in this last stage. These details are not the concern of the madman who's come up with them, or the architect who's organized them, or the carpenter who's nailed the ideas together, sentence by sentence. Save details for the judge.

Climate Adaptation – the key role of “adaptive resilience”

2012-05-02T14:39:00.000+09:30

It is now widely recognised that complete mitigation of global environmental change is already out of reach, and that consequently institutional frameworks for sustainable development must include governance for adaptation. (Note 1)

Local and regional governments will play a key role in efforts directed at the practical planning and implementation of climate change adaptation.

Adaptive Resilience Framework

The structure of efforts facilitated through services delivered by or on behalf of governments should be around:

1. Purpose focused policies
The focus should be on developing adaptive resilience through achievement of agreed objectives. (Note 2)

A resilience which goes beyond coping, to include continual adaptation and redesign in pursuit of core purpose.

2. Adaptive governance systems.
We should place emphasis on innovation and environmental scanning for future change, and structure organisations for capacity and change rather than assume a stable, fixed state.

Consistent, coherent and well researched risk information should be integrated into corporate and operational processes.

3. Risk based interventions.
Corporate risk assessment criteria should act as a strategic framework for priority setting and decision making activities, including the consideration of opportunities to build adaptive capacity, to advance learning, and to develop new approaches and programs.

Notes

1. “Rio+20 Policy Brief #3: Transforming governance and institutions for a planet under pressure” March 2012 p. 7.

2. Resilience can be usefully characterized by a combination of the following:

• Culture of shared purpose and values

• Predictable financial resources

• Strong internal and external networks

• Intellectual, human and physical assets

• Leadership, management and governance

• Adaptive capacity featuring innovation and experimentation

• Situation awareness of environment and performance

• Management of key vulnerabilities by planning for disruption

(Ref “Making adaptive resilience real” Mark Robinson, 2010 p. 27.)

Hazards, Vulnerability, Disasters - beyond musings on the meanings of words.

2012-03-12T15:24:00.000+10:30

This note is derived from a presentation to the FinPro Conference 2012, Creswick Novotel, Victoria, Australia. A copy of the complete paper is available here as a pdf.

By John Salter, Director Emergency Preparedness Capacity Builders

www.disasterresilience.com

A fundamental issue - Plans vs. Planning

Standards and Guidelines for disaster and business continuity management focus on two things:

To plan, establish, implement, operate, monitor, review, maintain and continually improve a documented management system; and
To protect against, reduce the likelihood of occurrence, prepare for, respond to and recover from disruptive incidents when they arise.

If our emphasis is on the documentation of yet another “plan, do, check, act” system, then standards will be a burden rather than an enabler – a significant risk in a marketplace already crowded with standards, systems and guidelines.

If standards and guidelines are used to support planning – active collaboration to achieve sound outcomes – with only the minimum necessary documentation – then it is more likely to deliver traction.

If we are mindful and use a strategic approach, we should address the key due diligence issue – or “coroner’s test”: i.e. “what you ought to know and do – about risks and their management”. The set of crucial decision points that should be addressed in every disaster management and business continuity management situation, are about:

(1) what is the risk (detection),

(2) what does the risk mean (recognition and interpretation),

(3) who has an interest (communication to multiple stakeholders), and

(4) who should do what (organization of a collaborative system).

Specific objectives will emerge according to the nature and scope of the particular disaster or crisis.

Key Terms - and their meanings

Words and their meanings – or their different meanings – are important when developing context and establishing shared understandings. This enables communication and avoids the “Tower of Babel” syndrome whereby many languages contribute to project failure.

So in checking some terms, let us start with “disaster”. First, while focused on pain thresholds and capacity to cope, the term disaster is contextual – "your thresholds and capacity to cope may not be the same as mine".

Risk is a function of the interface between hazards and the vulnerabilities of your "care-fors"

Second, it is important to recognize that "hazard events are not necessarily disasters". Yes, hazards contribute to risk, but an extreme event only becomes a disaster when it impacts something we attribute value to (our “care-abouts”).

For the same natural phenomenon - sink holes - different consequences.

Incorporating a focus on vulnerability opens up a rich vein of considerations - about what might be the most appropriate thing(s) to do to “protect against, reduce the likelihood of occurrence, prepare for, respond to and recover from disruptive incidents when they arise” (ISO 22313).

A risk based approach focuses on the likelihood of consequences – not the likelihood of hazard events.

While a risk based approach sits comfortable with an “all hazards” approach, it should be recognized that an “all hazards” approach is a civil defence construct – applying largely to response, relief and recovery arrangements which can benefit from such efficiencies. In a more comprehensive risk based approach there needs to be a recognition that “fire is not water” – and that prevention strategies for each need to be tailored.

The framework within which the risk based approach is applied is often referred to as PPRR – or Prevention, Preparedness, Response and Recovery. This P²R²heuristic device was introduced in the 1980’s as an instrument of American foreign policy to encourage third world nations away from reliance upon a post disaster “hand up for hand out” approach. It is not a simple linear construct – though it has constrained thinking by being used in that simple, indeed simplistic manner. A more useful display of the relationship between the four words is displayed here.

What does this mean for communities at risk and the businesses upon which they rely?
There is a need to develop - by planning before a disaster - strategies which reduce vulnerability. Line one in the diagram below which reflects the purpose – or business case – of business continuity planning. To mitigate impact before and after a disruption event.

Risk Assessment ≠ Risk Analysis

2012-02-11T14:20:00.003+10:30

One distinction between "risk management" in the USA and the rest of the world was - and maybe to a degree still is - the different meanings of "anaysis" and "assessment".

For the United States: "Assessment = Analysis"

For the rest: "Assessment = Identification + Analysis + Evaluation"

Aligned with the Intenational Risk Management Principles and Guidelines (ISO 31000)

Context and Identification are about nailing your risk issues by focusing on their consequences in relation to "the things you value" (objectives).
Analysis is about premising the likelihood of those consequences (given the effectiveness of current controls).
Evaluation involves judgment of acceptability.

To help address this issue and add some value to those who may want to consider it, we have developed a risk assessment tool which is aligned with the International Risk Management Standard, easy to use, inexpensive and works on Excel software as old as 1997 - or the most recent version.

The structure of the tool fully aligns with the structure of the ISO 31000 process.

More information on how the Risk Assessment Tool works is available by downloading this pdf.

We are please to make this immediate download available for the SALE price of only US$14.95

EPCB weekly Risk Management Newsletter launched

2012-01-16T18:36:00.000+10:30

To bring together items of common interest and tweets, EPCB will make available a "Paper.li" web-based publication which will provide a collection of (hopefully) interesting items in the one spot -The url for the publication is http://paper.li/risk_reward/1326694527 for those of you who want to consider subscribing to a weekly notification.

Three steps to developing a sound SIPOC diagram

2011-12-15T14:36:00.000+10:30

Overview Handout

Purpose: The purpose of a SIPOC Diagram is to define and document the key elements of an activity. This includes Customers/Requirements, Outputs, Process Steps/Requirements, Inputs and Suppliers.

Materials: SIPOC overview handout, whiteboard, worksheets, flipcharts, PowerPoint (not preferred as it can take away from engagement and participation), Posters, PostIts™ (or my favourite, coloured sticky arrows – which are then placed on a large, blank, laminated SIPOC chart)

Time: Varies. Plan for at least two hours based on the complexity of the process, the knowledge of the participants of the process, and their previous experience creating SIPOCs.

Step ONE: Get everyone on the same “purpose” page

Note 1 to facilitator: Do this step even if working with a knowledgeable group by reviewing the elements critical to conducting a successful SIPOC session.

Use this review as a means of setting a positive tone and developing a “conversational” style of facilitating the session.

The five critical elements to a good SIPOC are:

1. Provide participants a brief overview of the SIPOC structure and how it important to manage its use in terms of range of purposes.

Apply the Covey principle “begin with the end in mind”– SIPOCs are flexible tools and can be focused on achieving a range of purposes – such as project planning, or vulnerability mapping or organisational restructuring. So be mindful – ask how will you USE this SIPOC?

2. The challenge for service industries (as distinct from making widgets) is to think beyond the process column (where many SIPOCs start). The challenge for individuals is to think outside of their square.

3. When recording on the SIPOC use only as much detail as needed to understand/communicate effectively.

4. Record the agreed purpose of this SIPOC session – make the agreed purpose the label of the “car park”. The “car park” is an area of white space, such as butcher’s paper or a whiteboard on wheels, which is structured to capture – as they relate to the SIPOC element being mapped at the time - (1) assumptions (2) constraints (3) risks and (4) decision criteria

5. This is not an academic exercise - define how things really get done, not how we might want them to be.

Step TWO: Establish the Framework

Note 2 to facilitator: Groups sometimes prefer to be more “organic” than systematic. Be flexible and accommodate as long as the entire SIPOC form is completed with enough detail to understand the process. Be flexible and use plain language. Write it down, and then ask open-ended, clarifying questions to get it right. Place the “thing” or “issue” on the SIPOC at a place of best agreed fit. Challenge the status quo, test the understanding of the process, and encourage dialogue.

Note 3 to facilitator: A challenge from here on out in this process is to keep the group at a high level of detail - not allow them to get too granular. The detail can come later in the process flow diagram mapping or you can go back and break each key process step into sub-steps and SIPOC them. (It depends on the purpose of the SIPOC and the complexity of the process.)

Use the SIPOC framework (on the wall chart, computer, whiteboard, worksheet, or flipchart).

1. Seek permission and agreement from the group to start “backwards from the right” - from the Customer column.

Identify customers (some will be stakeholders with specified needs to be met which are contractual, or legally obligatory - others stakeholders may have a more indirect and general interest, needing only to be appropriately informed).
“Back into” the customer requirements column by now clearly stating the requirement(s) of each stakeholder.

(This two set customer column should be reviewed whenever something changes – so that the ripple effects can be mapped and managed.)

2. List the outputs from the process which will deliver the requirements of the customer – and collectively, achieve the required outcome of the activity.

3. Structure a process which will deliver the outputs effectively and efficiently.

Clearly identify the START of your process (cue, prompt, trigger that requires you to act).
Clearly identify the END of your process (how do you know you are done?).
List the 3-5 (NO MORE THAN 7) key steps in the process being mapped.
Incorporate feedback loops – how will you, your customer, your supplier communicate?

(Record: Process name; Process owner; Process performance measures/metrics – structured to inform improvement opportunities; any known operational definitions of key process elements; any known assumptions/constraints and immediately apparent risks - record in “car park)

Note 4 to facilitator: Remind the group that the assumptions and operational definitions are ongoing lists and may be added to as needed during the session. The idea is to make sure everyone is working on the same sheet of paper and means the same thing when using a term and those assumptions are made visible, discussed, and validated or challenged as appropriate.

4. List the inputs into each step of the process

List the requirements of each input (your view – the person doing the work)
List the supplier of each input of the process

5. List or highlight the Critical-to-Quality (CTQ) elements for the process

Step THREE: Check your work

• Review the completed SIPOC.

• Verify all key components are completed/addressed.

• Determine Next Steps/Action Plan.

• Make sure all assumptions are visible, discussed, validated, and documented.

• Document operational definitions of terms, symbols, acronyms, equipment, standards, etc.

• Do not forget to identify your information/communication loops and feedback mechanisms.

• Document source specifications, standard operating procedures, and/or references for your process.

• Review where you need to have Service Level Agreements (SLAs) – between you and supplier, you and customer.

Updated - EPCB's Buttress Facebook page

2011-12-11T16:38:00.002+10:30

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Buttress/113599418683658

Want to immediately purchase and download Buttress?

2011-12-11T14:08:00.001+10:30

Click on the screenshot to go to the secure purchase and download site

Only US$85.50 with the Coupon X147

Become an EPCB software sales partner (40% commission).

2011-12-10T16:08:00.001+10:30

Click on the screenshot to register as an EPCB software sales partner.

"I get knocked down ... I get up again"

2011-12-09T17:35:00.005+10:30

One of our favourite clients was recently hit by a significant fire (see video below).

The conclusions of the report to their governing body highlighted that:

"The early initiation of the Business Continuity Plan proved effective. A well managed and strategic approach to decision-making was evident. The Crisis Management Team was engaged at an early stage and managed the situation in a structured and strategic manner. The Business Continuity Plan worked well, and adequate administrative support and equipment was available."
(Reference: Report OCM.109/11 of 20 September 2011 on 'Portable Office Building Fire 15 June 2011', Section 5.3 Page 3).

The structure invoked and applied is based on EPCB's "Buttress" methodology.

The Buttress Software Package which is available as an immediate download (Database, Instructions, and Planning Template) is currently discounted - for less than $100 - plus another 10% off if you insert the Coupon X147

EPCB releases heavily discounted Business Continuity and Crisis Management Software

2011-12-08T21:49:00.003+10:30

EPCB is pleased to announce the release of the new Beta version of Buttress™

Buttress™ will help you understand your risks, evaluate your exposures, and take timely action. It is based on an easy to use Access Database which focuses on the vulnerability of your resources - to ensure you are more resilient to any source of risk – and to enable you to bounce back effectively.

As an integrated business continuity and crisis management package, Buttress™ has three distinguishing features.

First, it focuses on the things you need in order to run your business effectively. That is your resources – the assets, people, skills, information (electronic / non electronic), technology (including plant and equipment), premises and supplies which underpin your critical activities. This ensures an alignment with best practices business continuity standards, which have moved their focus away from hazard events towards business vulnerabilities.

Second, Buttress™ has a significant mitigation component – which empowers you to reduce your vulnerability before an incident – to build resilience into the structures and functions of your business.

Third, Buttress™ supports the decision making processes to manage the consequences of impact after an incident.

In summary, whether it is mitigation before an incident or crisis management after impact, Buttress provides a platform which allows straightforward data entry and the production of tailored reports to meet your decision making needs.

The Buttress™ package is made up of an Access Database, PowerPoint Guidelines (PDF), and a Crisis Management Planning Framework (PDF). It is available for immediate download as a Zip file.

At under $100, this current software offering is a heavily discounted Beta version which has been validated by EPCB clients across both the public and private sectors over the last two years. (Clients who had been significantly impacted by extreme events – fires, floods, and reputation loss. Clients who knew they needed a better approach.) To take advantage of this offer, go to the secure purchasing site.

National Emergency Risk Assessment Guidelines (NERAG)

2011-12-06T17:22:00.000+10:30

The National Emergency Risk Assessment Guidelines
(Click above for a free PDF download of the Guidelines)

"Enterprise Risk Management" - COSO or ISO 31000

2011-05-05T17:34:00.007+09:30

I have been recently asked to conduct a "workshop" on "Enterprise Risk Management". You know, the "COSO thing" which was a reaction to poor financial management. Followed by SOX et al. Ended up being a tick the box exercise for too many - and we had continued uncertainty and poor risk management. Not a good combination - as the latest financial crisis demonstrates.

So I was initially a little skeptical. Old wine, new bottles - maybe even a "corked" wine. However the organisers have been kind enough to steer away from a narrow, linear promotion of doctrine. Instead, I will facilitate the exploration of using the international risk management principles and guidelines (ISO 31000) to achieve enterprise-wide risk management outcomes. Ha! I hear you scoff - "that's hardly different". Well my friends, having worked in a few places and been around the traps for a few years I can tell you - not many entities actually have a tailored and integrated approach to risk management. Most are still characterised by a mixture of "layer cake" - with the top and bottom not knowing what each is up to. This mix is then pierced by some "silos" - of excellence maybe, but isolation definitely.

Anyway, if the topic appeals, and you are in Kuala Lumpur 5-6 July this year, and you can cover the fee - it would be great to have you as a participant. Regardless, the themes we will explore are laid out below if you just want to peruse and reflect.

Title: Enterprise-wide Risk Management

A workshop on using the international risk management principles and guidelines (ISO 31000) to achieve enterprise wide risk management outcomes.

Introduction to the scope of the workshop

The risk management space is characterised by having a range of frameworks and guidelines. Many of these risk management frameworks reflect specific industry applications. Sometimes they have been developed to support quite narrow “agenda driven” purposes. Others are a reaction to risk events themselves. However, there are some which reflect a more thoughtful and engaging development. This workshop will consider the strengths of several approaches (such as Enterprise Risk Management, and Business Continuity Management). Further, we will explore how these specific applications can be integrated into a context sensitive application of the International Risk Management Principles and Guidelines to achieve relevant and robust outcomes in support of your entity’s objectives.

Pre-reading

On January 11, 2011 – The Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) – an organization providing thought leadership and guidance on internal controls, enterprise risk management (ERM), and fraud deterrence – released a new thought paper relating to ERM aimed at providing guidance to help organizations advance along the ERM maturity curve. If participants get an opportunity to pre-read this thought paper, they should find it provides useful background (especially if they are new to this area):

Embracing Enterprise Risk Management: Practical Approaches for Getting Started (20 pages)

Key elements and workshop sessions

1. The maze of Standards, Frameworks, Principles and Guidelines

This session will explore:

· The structure of several specific standards (frameworks, principles, guidelines and standards) – in particular, Enterprise Risk Management COSO; Business Continuity Management BS 25999 and Risk Management ISO 31000.

· How these different “standards” relate to each other.

· How they can be harmonized into a nested framework which is aligned to your needs and context.

Learning outcomes include:

· Knowledge of the structure of Enterprise Risk Management COSO; Business Continuity Management BS 25999 and Risk Management ISO 31000.

· Understanding how these standards relate to each other.

· Awareness of issues when translating standards into context.

2. Gap Assessment

This session will explore:

· Why it is important, as an early activity, to map where you are against where you need to be (in relation to risk management capability).

· Identifying the necessary elements which should be measured.

· What performance criteria for the elements might look like.

· How the gap assessment might be displayed and communicated.

· Developing an easy to use tool suitable for your context.

Learning outcomes include:

· Awareness of the importance of gap assessment.

· Knowledge of the core relationship between necessary elements to be measured and sufficient performance criteria underpinning those elements.

· Knowledge of how gap assessments might be displayed and communicated.

· Knowledge of how to developing an easy to use tool suitable for your context.

3. Decision Making

This session will explore:

· What characterizes good decision making.

· Whether risk management is just good problem solving re-badged.

· Why analytic – deliberative processes are crucial.

· Some tools and techniques for good decision making.

Learning outcomes include:

· Awareness of what characterizes good decision making.

· Knowledge of what differentiates risk management from good problem solving.

· Awareness of why analytic – deliberative processes are crucial.

· Knowledge of some tools and techniques for good decision making.

4. Risk Criteria

This session will explore:

· Developing risk assessment criteria.

· Developing risk treatment selection criteria.

· The criticality of context when developing risk criteria.

Learning outcomes include:

· Understanding a range of issues involved in the development of risk assessment criteria.

· Understanding a range of issues involved in the development of risk treatment selection criteria.

· An awareness of critical, context sensitive factors when developing risk criteria.

5. From Principles to Integrated Implementation

This session will explore:

· Different models for implementing Enterprise-wide Risk Management

· Key issues of stakeholder engagement, marketing and training.

· Drafting an action plan for an Enterprise Risk Management initiative

Learning outcomes include:

· Awareness of the advantages and disadvantages of different models for implementing Enterprise-wide Risk Management

· Understanding the importance of stakeholder engagement, marketing and training.

· Knowledge of drafting an action plan for an Enterprise Risk Management initiative

6. Risk Assessment

This session will explore:

· The process role of risk assessment.

· A range of tools and techniques.

· A particular focus on vulnerability through scenario analysis.

· Some of the pros and cons - and what can we learn from them.

Learning outcomes include:

· An awareness of the core role of risk assessment processes.

· An awareness of a range of tools and techniques.

· Knowledge of why it is crucial to focus on vulnerability through scenario analysis.

· Knowledge of lessons learnt from inappropriate risk assessments.

7. Business Resilience

This session will explore:

· Leveraging the top three to five foreseeable extreme event scenarios.

· The advantages of moving away from a focus on extreme events and hazard to a focus on the vulnerability of the things we depend upon.

· The application of a scalable tool aligned with a best practice Business Continuity Standard (BS 25999).

Learning outcomes include:

· Understanding the value of leveraging the top three to five foreseeable extreme event scenarios.

· Understanding the advantages of moving away from a focus on extreme events and hazard to a focus on the vulnerability of the things we depend upon.

· Understanding how to apply a scalable tool aligned with a best practice Business Continuity Standard (BS 25999).

8. Continuous Improvement

This session will explore:

· How to improve corporate capabilities on an ongoing basis by training and exercising

· The key role of well designed desktop exercises before any extreme event

· The key role of sensitively facilitated organization debriefs after any extreme event.

Learning outcomes include:

· Awareness of the importance of improving corporate capabilities on an ongoing basis by training and exercising.

· Understanding how to manage a well designed desktop exercises before any extreme event.

· Understanding how to manage a sensitively facilitated organization debrief after any extreme event.

A Workshop Brochure is available for download here (8MB pdf).

After an emergency - a seven point self assessment

2011-04-14T17:58:00.000+09:30

This diagnostic tool will enable you to identify areas of strength and weakness in processes, capabilities and skills. The results from carrying out the assessment will also help in planning and implementing process capability improvements and systematically focus on areas of weakness.

Format of the self assessment
The self assessment consists of worksheets within a free MS Excel workbook.

Scoring - The relevant matters to take into account in considering the quality of management exercised center around seven key performance tests.

Sections cover performance in the following areas:

Seven Key Performance Elements

1. Detection
To what degree were early warning systems in place? To what degree were they effective?

2. Interpretation
To what degree were systems and methods which "mapped" answers to the question "what does this mean?" (This might have involved sophisticated geographic information systems, or meetings with hard copy map overlays). To what degree were these methods effective?

3. Planning to Communicate
To what degree had you premised the range of stakeholders who needed to be listened to, and communicated with? This reflection should consider how you planned for those who were likely to be at risk and how you planned with those who had a responsibility to support the management of the risks.

4. Communicating - with those at risk
To what degree was your communication to and with people at risk effective? To what extent did it elicit "appropriate protective behaviour"?

5. Communicating - with those managing the risks
To what degree was your communication with people with a responsibility to support the management of the risks effective?

6. Roles and Responsibilities
To what degree did plans contain a method by which they were invoked, up-to-date contact and mobilization details for any relevant agencies, organizations and resources that might be required to support the response. (For example, did they contain guidelines regarding which individuals have the authority to invoke the plan and under what circumstances; and contain identified lines of communications, roles and responsibilities, key tasks and reference information.)

7. Organisation
To what degree was a method for the organisation of a broader (i.e. beyond your own organisation) collaborative management system in place? (Such a system would allow stakeholders from across the community to establish agreed and prioritized objectives in terms of the critical activities to be undertaken, the timescales in which they are to be undertaken and measures of success in terms of outcomes to be achieved.)

Performance levels are attributed: N - not at all, P - partial, L - largely, and F - fully

Focused information supports sharp decision making

2011-03-28T15:36:00.001+10:30

Good CEOs know that when it comes to the relationship between information and decision making, more is not better.

This is in contrast to the real politik reflected in the wry humour of "The Smokescreen" (in Yes Prime Minister, by Jonathan Lynn and Anthony Jay, page 188). In the world of politics, perception is key. So decision making is dangerous - and to be avoided wherever possible. To this end, the passage from "The Smokescreen" notes:

"There are eleven stages in a decision making process -

Informal discussions
Formal proposals
Preliminary study
Discussion document
In-depth study
Revised proposal
Policy
Strategy
Implementation plan circulated
Revised implementation plan
Cabinet authorisation"

The pasage goes on to note that any public servant should be able to ensure that if a policy is unwelcome, stage 11 will not be reached until the next election. Unfortunately this approach is seen too often - I guess that is why the television series was so popular with politicians.

In the real world, decisions have to be made - often quickly - and frequently under conditions of uncertainty.

It is under these circumstances that information which is focused on the decision makers' needs is critical. The decision maker may need to know all that is available to him or her. However it is more likely that they will appreciate a focused set of information tailored to their needs. At EPCB we address this requirement with a framework of information based on best practice business continuity standards, with which we then support clients to tailor to their context.

Excerpt from the Table used to Tailor Reports

The approach can be seen at "Tailored Reporting to meet your needs".

Innovative responses mitigate disaster impact (Christchurch 2011)

2011-02-25T13:55:00.002+10:30

Christchurch impact indicator - dust rising from collapses after quake.

As the response moves to recognise the breadth of impact across the city, its infrastructure and its people, New Zealanders are applying several innovative "emergent resources" to mitigate the impact of this disaster.
Key issues are around "lifelines" - the networks that supply and link us to meet our core needs (from power, and water to communication).

The need to communicate is the glue that binds the efforts and three illustrations are apt:
1. Telecom NZ has 60 electricity generators and five portable mobile phone towers to keep the phone network up.
2. Google has set up an online finding service:

3. Online auction site Trade Me, set up a service linking people needing accommodation and assistance with those willing to offer it.

In this scenario of devestation, one hopes that these and other emergent, innovative approaches will be enough to see Christchurch get up and running.

Obvious and Necessary - modern risk management.

2011-02-01T11:00:00.001+10:30

I came across an interesting article by Leon Gettler today titled "Risk management in the era of unpredictability" (page 6, in the Opinion and Analysis Business Section of The Age newspaper, 1 Feb 2011).

Interesting not only because it reflected a position dear to my heart, - but interesting because it was a lead article specialising in what I thought was "a given". Can it still be that modern companies and organisations HAVE NOT adopted a flexible approach to risk management? What are they thinking? The solution is necessary - and it is not difficult.

In terms of the necessity of the solution Gettler wrote:
"The conventional risk-management approach lists possible events and determines the probability of their occurring based on experience. You measure the costs and benefits of specific risk-protection measures and implement these measures for each risk. The problem is that it assumes risks are local and routine and fails to take into account the impact they may have on different organisations and states. It does not factor in the impact of the growing number of unlikely but potentially devastating events. It is an outdated approach that robs organisations of their agility. Clearly, these sorts of events are impossible to predict. So, how should organisations respond? It is a subject that should be reviewed by boards regularly. Companies should have scenario-mapping teams that report to the board and work with suppliers and customers to identify potential threats. Twenty-first century risk management is not about predicting the future. It is about systems and relationships that create an organisation agile enough to respond when disaster strikes. (my emphasis) As it will."

In terms of the solution being "straightforward", if an organisation asks the fifteen questions in the diagram below, they will have the necessary and sufficient profile - of both their vulnerability and their needs.

"One Off" disaster levies reflect poor policy.

2011-01-21T11:35:00.001+10:30

This morning, Australians woke to page one headlines "PM Flags one-off flood tax".
This raises questions beyond those driven by party politics. It raises issues around how we, as a community, operate strategically. To what degree we operate sustainably.

Inundated floodplain development, Queensland, 2011

As a community, (in this case the "shared association" is as a nation) our constitution clearly nests the responsibility for the protection of life and property with State governments. Founded as a colony, we have a legacy of ports and hinterlands which have competed to attract development. A key discount lever used to attract development in the past has been "discounting". Sometimes with cheap flat land served with transport infrastructure and subsidised migrant labor. Sometimes with "light" requirements around standards. This has been so from flood plains to industrial zones. The outcome has been "hazard havens" where some States have imposed risks on citizens more severly than other States. Further, the benefits from such ventures do not generally go to those living near to the risky sites.

All of this is contextual to the challenges of the future.
Now - at a national level - we need to agree approaches to some fundamental questions.
By what country wide, consistently applied criteria will we address risks?

A systematic risk management framework

The risk management record of this national government has been characterised by a series of policy failures (from pink batts to school funding). Central to all of these failures has been the inability to bring the right questions to the table. The current knee jerk looks like the trend is embedded in their culture. One off fixes applied indiscriminately and an ignorance of insurance are indications of a government struggling to develop and apply a comprehensive and integrated approach. Unless a systematic and thoughtful approach is undertaken, we are likely to see further grounds for challenging the integrity of the current government.

New Business Continuity Standard for Australia's financial sector

2011-01-04T07:04:00.001+10:30

The Private Sector is increasingly held accountable for quality risk management. In many cases this takes the form of mandated performance standards. The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority has recently released the draft of their proposed Business Continuity Management Standard. The proposed standard aligns with international best practices. It makes Boards accountable for very specific Business Continuity Management capabilities - summarised in Clause 21 - to include (at a minimum):
1. Business Continuity Management Policy;
2. Business Impact Analysis including Risk Assessment;
3. Recovery Objectives and Strategies;
4. Business Continuity Plan including Crisis Management and Recovery; and
5. Programs for Review and Testing of the Business Continuity Plan; and Training and Awareness of staff in relation to Business Continuity Management.

APRA's draft Business Continuity Management Standard (PDF)

In any Risk Management venture "Establishing Context" is crucial

2010-12-13T18:59:00.010+10:30

There is a tendency for people to want to rush to the exciting stuff. To get their hands dirty with extreme event scenarios and risk assessments. That is a mistake.

It is important to pack your bags for the long trip - to lean your ladder up against the right wall - to start with an awareness of issues which might ambush "the end in mind". These phrases apply to any systematic risk management process - where an initial emphasis should be on scoping context. If not, believe me, it will unravel later.

So with many "burn and learn" examples over many years, may I suggest the following three key considerations:

1. Develop a project plan to establish the risk management context which includes:

a. the aims and objectives for the establishment of context;

b. a matrix of stakeholders against their roles and responsibilities; and

c. a budgeted and scheduled plan for anticipated research and consultation.

2. Profile the entity for which “context” is being established (e.g. the structure of the organisation; or the demographics of a community) by mapping key networks including:

a. relationships between people and organisations to identify and evaluate existing networks; and

b. other network relationships that do not exist, but which might add value should they be developed and established through negotiation, consultation and marketing strategies to gain trust cooperation and support.

3. Apply strategies to seek and obtain stakeholders’ co-operation and ownership of the risk management context including:

a. establish and coordinate open communication structures among the networks mapped;

b. consult with stakeholders to map their issues and needs across the following aspects or “spaces” - social, legal, technical, political, environmental, and financial; and

Establishing risk appetite early is fundamental

c. identify criteria and thresholds for “acceptable risk” across the aspects or “spaces” identified with stakeholders; and document the level of agreement and divergence between stakeholders regarding risk criteria to be applied. Two sets of criteria should be addressed. Risk assessment criteria – that is, “what do we care about - and how much do we care”; and what are agreed risk treatment selection criteria to be applied.

Disaster Funds: Lessons & Guidance on the Management & Distribution of Disaster Funds

2010-11-26T10:39:00.001+10:30

Please find reproduced below, in full, an email from Dr. John Twigg

Disaster Action - a great organisation - has just released what looks like a really useful new publication:

"Controversy surrounds many disaster funds, even decades after they were launched. Little guidance is available to those who take on the responsibility of managing and distributing funds in accordance with the wishes of the donors. Disaster Funds: Lessons & Guidance on the Management & Distribution of Disaster Funds, published by Disaster Action with support from the DCMS and the British Red Cross, fills that gap. It is an essential resource for emergency planners, fund trustees, administrators and managers."

Download from www.disasteraction.org.uk the ninety four page PDF and the five page nutshell pamphlet PDF

Return to EPCB's website - Risk Management

Post disaster shelter and sustainability

2010-11-02T07:44:00.001+10:30

Professor David Sanderson, Director, Centre for Development and Emergency Practice (CENDEP) at the School of the Built Environment, Oxford Brookes University has announced that as a follow-up to the ELRHA funded shelter conference held at CENDEP in September in association with CARE UK, the final report, presentations and podcasts awesome sessions are now available online at http://bit.ly/cSRhQs

The conference examined what role shelter should have in disaster relief and development while critically reflecting on its implementation at local and international levels. It was agreed, that while technological shelter solutions are important, good shelter practice always puts people first. This may mean reassessing practitioners' roles and responsibilities to include ways to work more successfully with affected people in a process, rather than focusing on providing an end product.

Simple things can put you at risk.

2010-08-16T10:03:00.001+09:30

It is early days in the investigation of the fire which destroyed the Liverpool Council offices over the weekend but some interesting things are immediately apparent.

"The fire has thrown one of Sydney's biggest and busiest councils into turmoil, losing its website, meeting place and important items including strategic plans, engineering documents and development applications." (Ref Daily Telegraph, 16 Aug 2010)

News Clip Video of the Liverpool Council Fire, 14 Aug 2010.

There is a continuity plan in place - however it seems to have been underpinned by some interesting decisions.

First, backing up customer paperwork. In this case, the loss of development applications from the end of last week. A simple process analysis would place a "scan and file off site" step at the beginning of the process. This reflects respect for what the client is submitting - the backup process is not just about the assessment by the planning department. Or is it? So a question about "how and what" were they thinking arises.

Second, the commentary from the YouTube news video reports the building had no sprinklers. This means either the business continuity plan has not been nested within the organisations risk management arrangements or it has been nested and a cost benefit assessment advised not to install sprinkler systems. Which of these is so will be confirmed by the coroner.

Third, a key principles of managing a crisis is "communicate, communicate, communicate". In the modern world, best practice demands a "go to" webpage - even if it only tells customers what is available and what is not available. A default url to switch to is as important as a backup customer service centre line. Unfortunately this is not being provided (as of 11.00am Monday 16 Aug 2010)