A mixed report card for European BCM planning - Marsh 2010 EMEA research

Business Continuity Forum research news

Marsh publish new 2010 research on European wide BCM attitudes and opinion.

Two years ago Marsh published its first in-house survey into Business Continuity attitudes, this year's update gives us considerable food for thought in how the industry is developing and where priorities should lie. 

Encouragingly many of the underlying attitudes to business continuity appear to be positive, although there is clear evidence of different countries and industries progressing at markedly different rates. In the most established markets BCM has clearly become a core topic generally aligning well with the goals and objectives of the organisation. Integration across the business has also been seen to improve.

Covering some 225 organisations many of whom are large and/or finance based does add a tinge of bias on the findings that impacts on the applicability of the study to the wider sector interests (SME's etc) especially when one considers the international scope of the study, but this is a minor factor when compared to the detailed findings demonstrated. There is also a degree of interpretation of the findings that has been added by the Marsh management team to further analyse the findings, adding depth on what they feel is the landscape for BCM in 2010 that we feel is generally insightful and pretty much on target.

The main finding highlighted by the associated press release focuses on the overconfidence of many organisations in their BCM planning with 83% stating that BCM was integral to their risk management, but with fewer than 30% feeling it had led to improved risk–intelligent decision-making.

What is clear though throughout the report is that respondents valued Business Continuity Management far more highly than the 2008 report showed. In addition, weaknesses were seen relating to the scope of planning and how organisations are assessed and integrated risk management. Significant market variation was seen between sectors, in one sense perhaps connected with the experience of the organisation, but far more likely in our opinion to be the result of refined planning rather than holistic planning.

Marsh have delivered an insightful report that makes interesting reading and certainly mirrors the experience we have gained. Of particular interest to the Continuity Forum is the section relating to “Barriers to BCM”. Here we see 13 different categories mapped, all pertinent, but combining to dilute the message. This is further enhanced by the general attitudes detailed in Industry Barriers and the number of undecideds on topics such as alignment with the BSI  BS25999 Standard for Business Continuity Management. 

The Marsh management team conclude that this is substantially due to a lack of understanding of the resource and commitment required to do the job properly. We certainly agree with this, though we would go further and suggest another underlying factor that needs to be addressed... Education. 

The role of BCM within complex organisations does cut across numerous operational and logistical areas. It connects with other specialist disciplines, such as ICT and risk management, and has aspects that relate to Audit and Governance. This, our own research suggests, leads to misunderstandings, conflicts of priorities and even a serious amount of organisational “politics” for many. The mixed bag of barriers presented by the survey findings combine to further illustrate this position once you scratch beneath the surface. Connecting Business Continuity Management with all the elements necessary within a business is not always easy or  straightforward, far from it in some cases.  There is most definitely a learning curve needed to adopt truly effective practices that deliver real value.

Too often BCM is considered a subset of another discipline or process and we feel this is a mistake and leads directly to the types of confusion indicated in the Marsh study. We see ongoing support and education of management (at all levels) as vital to address these barriers and difficulties, from the very start of any BCM project all the way through to its completion and, importantly, at every review and reiteration thereafter. 

Engaging and educating management is as much a part of the BCM manager's role as developing and maintaining the plans. Through a more robust approach to the education and development of those we need to be connected to BCM, we feel that there will be far fewer barriers imposed in the future eventually enabling the process to be better adopted and implemented in a structure that enhances the whole BCM programme and ultimately delivering even better value and performance for all stakeholders.

To download the Marsh 2010 survey please click here.

If you would like to comment on this story please e-mail us at feedback@ContinuityForum.org.