Prepare for the worse

According to a survey published by the Chartered Management Institute, many engineering businesses are failing to prepare for disruption, despite evidence outlining the business benefits of disaster planning.

Many engineering businesses are failing to prepare for disruption, despite evidence outlining the business benefits of disaster planning, according to a survey published by the

.

The 2006 Business Continuity Management Survey highlights the impact of disasters at home and abroad, including a potential influenza pandemic, and is said to uncover signs of inactivity and complacency.
Although 66 per cent of managers in the engineering sector believe business continuity is viewed as important by their senior management teams, 39 per cent said their organisation has a business continuity plan (BCP) in place.

Organisations in the sector are also failing to rehearse plans as often as they should - only 37 per cent of those with plans test them at least once a year, compared to 52 per cent in 2005. Where rehearsals have taken place, 79 per cent have revealed shortcomings in their plans.

Inanimate objects still dominate business continuity management (IT is covered by 67 per cent of plans) despite organisations admitting a fear of losing people and skills. For example, 91 per cent believe they would suffer disruption caused by higher levels of absenteeism and illness in an influenza pandemic, yet 93 per cent do not have robust plans to cope with this absence.

Register now to continue reading

Thanks for visiting The Engineer. You’ve now reached your monthly limit of premium content. Register for free to unlock unlimited access to all of our premium content, as well as the latest technology news, industry opinion and special reports. 

Benefits of registering

  • In-depth insights and coverage of key emerging trends

  • Unrestricted access to special reports throughout the year

  • Daily technology news delivered straight to your inbox