A few days ago I followed a linked post from Trevor Levine’s Riskczar blog and discovered Rick Nason’s RDS Solutions Blog. Rick is writing some interesting stuff, challenging traditional thinking and practice around Risk Management. I commented on his earlier piece on the need for creativity, but felt that this post about the need to […]
… the 4R Framework for resilience
Today I am looking at another US school of thought on resilience. The 4R Resilience Framework, and the work of Michel Bruneau. These folks are coming to the discussion from the perspective of earthquake engineering, but the model can have applicability in other areas. Essentially they define resilience according to three outcomes; reduced probability of failure reduced […]
… resilience requires agile leadership
I came across this article amongst all the stuff in my Google Reader – Agility – The Skill You Want to Develop in 2010. I have not read a lot that caught my attention from this blog in the past. But there are a couple of things from this article I think are relevant. The Centre […]
… heritage or legacy BC?
I find myself using the term “traditional” Business Continuity often. But is really doesn’t convey the meaning I intend. So which term should we use Legacy BC or Heritage BC? Yesterday Jan Husdal posted a comment on my “… the meaning of resilience is vague“. He made the observation that there is really little difference between resilience […]
… a US view on resilience
In two previous posts I have reviewed some New Zealand schools of thought on resilience – New Zealand Resilience Trust and Resilient Organisations. Today I am looking at some US thinking, the Centre For Resilience at Ohio State University. These guys cover a wide range of thinking in the area of resilience, from its early […]
- « Previous Page
- 1
- …
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- 68
- …
- 70
- Next Page »