This year marks the 150th Anniversary of the start of the American Civil War. While I was in the USA last month I took the opportunity to respect that anniversary by visiting a number of Civil War memorial locations.
While listening to the National Park guides and the video presentations it struck me that there were a number of key learnings from these events that can be applied to the way in which we approach the practice of Business Continuity Management.
We often talk about military issues in relation to BCM and broader business management. Sun Tzu is widely quoted for a range of things and Von Clauswitz’ “fog of war” is a common reference for crisis management and decision making under uncertainty.
This series starts in Manassas, Virgina, July 21, 1861. The first major land battle of the war.
1. Supply Chain and Communications are primary
This was one of the first wars fought in the Industrial era, railroads as a form of transportation are important.
Manassas, at that time, was a key road and rail junction. About 40km from Washington, this junction controlled the line west into the Shenandoah Valley, north to Washington and South towards the Confederate capital at Richmond.
Communication and supply lines were so important that a second major battle was fought at Manasas 13 months later.
Supply chains and communication are essential for BCM, too often we forget that. They dictate where we need to focus and the terrain we need to fight the battle for.
Planning and preparation only inside your organisation or silo is planning to fail. Having a documented plan has never been enough – you have to be able to communicate with all relvant players.
There is a saying in the BC/Crisis Management business, I am sure you have heard, which goes something like this;
If you have a plan, but cannot communicate you will fail
If you have no plan but can communicate you have a chance
Hopefully we are spending the appropriate amount of time on preparedness up and down the supply chain and on our communications.
2. Part-time teams and unseasoned troops
After the outbreak of hostilities in April, 1861, the North raised a volunteer army of based on 90 day enlistments. Not surprisingly this created some political pressure on the military to engage in battle before the troops were ready.
The problem with BCM is we cannot choose when we need to swing into action – so we need to be ready today.
Lack of capability to execute basic maneuvers meant that the Union army was not really able to execute their commander’s battle plan. As a result they were routed in the battle on this day.
Do you plan to use “unseasoned” and part-time recovery teams and crisis management in your organisation?
Most corporates have to live with limited preparation and training for their recovery leadership and action teams. In which case we need to ensure we have prepared a battle plan that matches our level of training and capability.
3. Bottom-Up Engagement and Battles
As a result of the unskilled troops not executing their movements as expected, and bad intelligence about the terrain, the Union army arrived on the field in a disjointed fashion. Different divisons engaged the enemy, or held, in their own time.
Unfortunately this is the way I see most organisation approach BCM. Bottom up planning. It is an approach designed to break down in the heat of battle.
Too often it contains assumptions (often incorrect) about what other units are doing. It is guided by the narrow, local view of priorities. The bigger picture of priority and the overall recognition of the ‘commanders intent’ is overlooked.
Template driven approaches do not rectify the problem – they actually cause it.
4. Complacency and Sustainability
At the outset of the Civil War it appeared that both sides believed the conflict would be short, perhaps only one major battle would be required. As I noted above the North has raised an army based on 90-day enlistments.
Neither side had planned and prepared for a sustained campaign. Perhaps they were blinded by their belief in the righteousness of their cause – perhaps it was just arrogance and belief in their own invincibility?
I have seen this same lack of sustainability in so many companies BC preparations.
- Normally you will find this in alternate operating arrangements that are only viable for 2-3 days.
- Often you will find it in Work Area Recovery contracts that are limited by cost rather than actual need.
- Almost always you find it in companies that adopt compliance and “tick box” approaches to BCM.
I vividly recall an example with one client, which again highlights the failure of bottom-up approaches, where a manager had reduced the investment of his unit in recovery site facilities as he did not see the need for his business unit. He was taking the compliance approach and got his “tick”, but did not have a sustainable capability.
Unfortunately that decision had a catastrophic impact on the recovery operating ability of another critical unit.
How long can you sustain your recovery operations?
Or are you betting on only needing one small battle to win your war?
First Manassas, or Bull Run as it was known by the Union, taught both sides that they needed to sustain.
On 22 July 1861, President Lincoln signed an order raising an army with 3 year enlistments. Amazing what you learn, and how quickly, when you suffered a major defeat.
Unfortunately when we suffer the major defeat in the BCM space, we may not get a second chance.
Not adjusting to the impacts of new technology is also a common theme. In will take that issue, and others, into the next post.
Leave a Reply