Author: Robin Hamilton
Over the years, having been involved in many projects that have been initiated in response to drivers to improve service delivery, we have found that invariably, the project becomes an end itself, rather than a means of delivering the actual goal of improving service.
So having an independent person solely focused on benefit realisation, who keeps asking the Big Y question on behalf of clients was critical. This aspect, which is sometimes overlooked, aligns with the PRINCE (PRojects IN Controlled Environments… rather than Purple Rain) approach and plays a significant role in keeping projects aligned with their intended objectives and within budget.
We are reminded of this as we work with our clients on their transitional arrangements to meet the Operational Resilience March 2025 deadline. How are they progressing in being able to demonstrate that they would consistently stay within their impact tolerances under a range of severe but plausible disruptions?
The testing regimes and exercises presented to us, struggle to meet the Big Y test when it comes to consistently preventing intolerable harm.
Some of the common themes that emerge are that the scenario bar is set too low in terms of severity, the exercise focus is solely internal, testing existing business continuity capability with no link to impact tolerances, or exercises are too often undertaken with assumptions that are at best, extremely optimistic.
Currently our focus is on helping our clients move on from their understandable focus on the compliance element of Operational Resilience, to the Big Y, which we know will help them survive and prosper in a highly volatile and unstable environment.
If you would like our help to benchmark your current approach to plausible testing, run a severe but plausible scenario, with a safe environment for lessons to be learnt, or provide the critical support and guidance needed to develop credible transitional arrangements, contact us on 020 3475 2953 for more information.