Critical Incident Response is an essential element in any Business Continuity/Disaster document. While not a pleasant scenario to consider, the inevitability of a data breach or catastrophic event underscores the importance of having a well-prepared response. The Critical Incident Response plan is designed to offer the necessary framework for strategically navigating through what is bound to be a highly stressful period.
In my years of creating many Critical Incident Response plans, I've noted that organizations often maintain two distinct types of plans—one primarily focused on technology and another centered around people and infrastructure. The separation of these two aspects appears to stem from a mindset and organizational perspective that considers technology as discrete from human and physical elements. While this may have been valid in the era when technology was proprietary and predominantly on-premises, the landscape has evolved with the advent of the cloud. The complexity has shifted from immense hardware considerations to areas of data compliance and privacy.
In light of these changes, it seems prudent to reconsider the existing approach. Combining the technology and people/plant critical incident response plans into a comprehensive, unified document could better address the current landscape and provide a more holistic and effective strategic response.
By doing so, a unified Business Continuity/Disaster Plan recognizes the interconnected nature of technology, human resources, and infrastructure in the modern business environment.
My current Technology Business Continuity Plan that includes Critical Incident Response for technology also needs to refer to the school's people and infrastructure. It needs to because the people involved are the same in the People and Plant Incident Response Plan, and the outcomes in the technology plan also contain require the same resources in communications and business operations.
This wholist approach has other advantages too. The need to navigate between multiple documents is minimized. It will also remove redundancy in updating necessary sections as both documents require emergency contact information, emergency task forace roles, decision making trees, etc. A document that contains both gives a holistic picture. It gives leaders additonal perspective on the complexities in their counterparts areas and assist in identifying possible gaps in their own respective areas.
Comments
Post a Comment