The November/December 2009 issue of the BCI’s “Continuity” magazine has an article entitled “The multi-purpose BCM manager” (by Rick Cudworth and Chris Apps). These gentlemen work in Deloitte’s BC and Resilience practice.
This is an interesting article that proposes a new skill set is required for BC Managers who seek to promote resilience rather than Heritage BC. To me that does not seem too surprising as we are seeking to change the practice and thinking of what contitutes BCM. The authors question whether the BC discipline is currently doing enough to attract the right talent and skills to address these new approaches.
They position resilience as something that has to be driven top-down and embedded into the organization, not an extra bolt-on piece. As a result reslience can deliver some benefits for day-to-day operations. I would certainly agree with that view!
- engage more effectively with a broader range of stakeholders
- influence strategic decision making
- understand a broader range of risks and risk appetites
- analyse business activities and their dependencies and help determine business priorities
- have a much stronger grasp of technology
- manage project or programme delivery more effectively
- Communicating and influencing skills
- Stakeholder management and communiction are seen by some as the most important skills required
- Need to be able to prove themselves as trusted business partners and facilitators
- Recognizes that resilience requires top level executive engagement
- Broader technical knowledge
- Subject matter knowledge spanning IT infrastructure, DR Testing, corporate governannce and exercising and rehearsal
- Sound analytical judgement
- Since there is no right answer, need to evaluate options and feasibility. Need for innovation and creativity.
- Here is another post about the need for creativity in Risk Management, would certainly be relevant to this discussion also.
- They advocate adapting from BC Standards rather than blindly adopting – heresy!
- Since there is no right answer, need to evaluate options and feasibility. Need for innovation and creativity.
- Jack of all trades
- Unlikely to get all this in a single person.
- In my experience we have been doing this in BC since the beginning.
- Project and Programme Management
- Too often this seems to be a part-time role for the BC person – as a result the programme suffers.
The most pressing gap they see is the lack of IT skills. How ironic – in a discipline that for many years was seen as too IT-centric.
The article concludes with a view to the future. To attract the new talent requires that we establish BCM as a more recognised career path with more obvious opportunities. They also advocate the need for improvement in recognised training and certifications.
I agree that we need to get better skilled professionals into the BC discipline. It was fascinating to see that they consider lack of IT knowledge/skills to be the greatest need, and also that subject matter skills need improvement.
Current trends are for the various international BC Standards to adopt the “management systems” approach, and as a result there will be less subject matter specific knowledge in these standards. A timely call to ensure that we actually maintain a commonly accepted body of knowledge regarding professional practice.
I tend to agree with the article. I agree that the skill set is required to take BCM further. Too often, the BCM head or coordinator fell on the person who did not step back fast enough when the organisation was looking for volunteers.
I agree with their viewpoint. More importantly, I would add an extra requirement: Sound knowledge of the business and operations – I really mean “sound knowledge” and not artificial knowledge. I have seen the sucess of putting this kind of individual into an organisation to take BC way above the call of duty. You do find those gems out there that can actualy meet all these requirements and more – the problem in attracting these people is the “low opinion” of BC out there and the lack of executive buy in. The industry must be proud of well oiled BC capabilities and must show these off. The proof is in the pudding.
Ken, you know who Im talking about.
I tend to agree with the article. I agree that the skill set is required to take BCM further. Too often, the BCM head or coordinator fell on the person who did not step back fast enough when the organisation was looking for volunteers.
I agree with their viewpoint. More importantly, I would add an extra requirement: Sound knowledge of the business and operations – I really mean “sound knowledge” and not artificial knowledge. I have seen the sucess of putting this kind of individual into an organisation to take BC way above the call of duty. You do find those gems out there that can actualy meet all these requirements and more – the problem in attracting these people is the “low opinion” of BC out there and the lack of executive buy in. The industry must be proud of well oiled BC capabilities and must show these off. The proof is in the pudding.
Ken, you know who Im talking about.
Thanks for the comment Pat,
That is a good point you raise about the “sound knowledge” aspect – it should be considered a new skill in many BC professionals.
Unfortunately there is still a wide-spread practice where the BC practitioner is simply the purveyor of templates and compliance with a process. The press-ganged ‘volunteer’ you refer to is expected to understand their business and plan for recovery.
Clearly that is not the intent of the article, where they position a BC professional as needing to be seen as a partner with the business.
The promotion of the profession is a clear call from the article, so hopefully we can find ways to promote these excellent examples of BC practice, which in turn may attract more talented professionals to the field.
Have a good holiday, and keep reading.
Thanks for the comment Pat,
That is a good point you raise about the “sound knowledge” aspect – it should be considered a new skill in many BC professionals.
Unfortunately there is still a wide-spread practice where the BC practitioner is simply the purveyor of templates and compliance with a process. The press-ganged ‘volunteer’ you refer to is expected to understand their business and plan for recovery.
Clearly that is not the intent of the article, where they position a BC professional as needing to be seen as a partner with the business.
The promotion of the profession is a clear call from the article, so hopefully we can find ways to promote these excellent examples of BC practice, which in turn may attract more talented professionals to the field.
Have a good holiday, and keep reading.