Further, there is the very real threat of natural and manmade disasters like these disrupting the working patterns of organizations. Hence, there is a need to plan for contingencies and ensure that the business of the firm or company does not suffer during the emergency. Towards this end, a business continuity program is designed to insulate the business from the downsides of the calamity and ensure that continuity of business happens within days or even hours of the incident happening. This article looks at how a typical business continuity program works.

The first thing to note in a business continuity program is that a backup site needs to be provided for the employees to report to in case of damage to the existing business location. This backup site can be in the same city or at a safe distance from the existing location in another city. In some cases, backup sites are even located outside the country so that any disaster like war that impacts the whole country can be mitigated. For instance, Polaris Software and Infosys are two companies that have invested in backup sites in other Asian countries like Sri Lanka and Philippines.

The next thing that a business continuity program needs to have is a mechanism to reach the employees in case of an emergency and make them move to the backup site. This is done by many companies like Fidelity that have lists of the employees along with their contact details and the easiest way to reach them during an emergency.

Further, a management level (mid or senior) person takes care of reaching a group of employees and the percolation goes down to the next levels as well as junior managerial staff take the responsibility of reaching down the hierarchy.

The third component of the business continuity program is to have an arrangement for the employees to get to the backup site within the SLA (Service Level Agreement) for the continuity program. As mentioned above, the continuity of business can happen within hours if the conditions permit and might take days if the calamity is drastic. For this to happen, the employees need to be told how to reach the backup site in case of an emergency and continue working from there.

Further, specific employees can be asked to reach the backup site instead of all the employees as continuity of business is usually focused on restarting work rather than reaching full output.

Finally, the most important thing about a business continuity program is the maintenance of the backup site. If the backup site fails to power up or load when an emergency strikes, the whole purpose of the business continuity program is lost. So, the essential thing to note in a business continuity program is that the backup site must be operationally ready at all times. Companies like Citigroup conduct periodic checks on the site readiness of the backup sites to ensure that they can be ramped up in no time.

In conclusion, business continuity is all about managing the surprise in an emergency. So, the more agile the staff is in responding to uncertainty, the better placed the company would be to respond to emergencies and disruptions of business.

Simply put, the term denotes the recovery of the business or the service from an outage or disruption. The rapidity with which the service is restored depends on how well the business continuity was planned for and managed during the downtime and subsequent recovery.

Business continuity management has been at the forefront of corporate planning in recent years because of the interconnected and integrated global economy where one outage to one service threatens the whole chain involved.

In recent months, after the Fukushima disaster, business continuity management has become a buzzword for companies and governments alike with increased emphasis on how fast the business or the department recovers in case of disruption. And the examples of banks like Citibank and Standard Chartered which have well planned business continuity programs is a classic case of corporates thinking ahead and planning for emergencies.

For mission critical applications like the software in banks, power stations and airports, the criticality of the service means that there is zero tolerance for downtime. We have seen in the last one year how the automated system at the IGI (Indira Gandhi International Airport) went down throwing the entire airport into chaos and severely impacting the travel plans of thousands of passengers. Hence, it becomes a matter of vital importance that such systems have continuity programs in place which would minimize the downtime and reduce the outage effect.

Business continuity management is not just about having systems in place for backups and to fall back on. There needs to be a mindset change in the employees who operate these systems and hence what is needed is the ability to switch to the backup system or the offshore site and resume operations within no time. For this to happen, the workforce must be adequately trained to react swiftly in case of emergencies and load the backup system or rush to the offsite to ensure uninterrupted service. These abilities call for agility and speed in the workforce and this can be achieved only through mock drills and procedures that stimulate the actual disasters.

Of course, however much corporates plan for emergencies, “when it strikes” the spur of the moment reactions from the workforce and the robustness of the backup systems determine how well the business continuity management program works. To achieve the scalability that is needed and to ensure reliability the corporates must invest in state of the art business continuity programs which manage the downtime well and ensure that the users are not affected in a major way.

In conclusion, business continuity management is not just about people or machines but the combination of both which needs to click in the event of an emergency. The best laid plans go waste if there is no backup hierarchy to manage the continuity program. So, along with the workforce and the systems, astute management and visionary leadership are required.

For instance, companies may have to deal with natural and manmade disasters like earthquakes and terrorist attacks. Around the world, different countries have differing risks and hence, companies have to ensure that their disaster preparedness is according to the specific risk that the location and the region in which they are based carries. This is particularly true for multinationals that operate in several countries and where they have to tailor their business continuity plans according to the location.

For instance, Citibank has a disaster preparedness plan for all its locations worldwide depending on the specific risks that each country poses to its operations. In Indonesia, the bank has an emergency plan to cover earthquakes and other natural disasters whereas in countries like India, the bank budgets for strikes and civil unrest as well.

Hence, it is in the nature of things for these companies to ensure that their disaster preparedness is global in thought but local in execution. This Glocal component which means that global companies have to adapt to local conditions is a necessary precondition for the multinationals before they start operating in the various countries across the world.

Further, business continuity plans world over differ greatly in their focus and scope. For example, in Singapore, most of the major IT companies like IBM do not have to plan for power outages and disruptions to basic services as the infrastructure there is world class and fail safe. On the other hand, in countries like India, the IT majors have to take into account these considerations as well.

Further, these companies have to ensure that their communications systems work in case of an emergency as is the emphasis on ensuring that the mobile service providers ensure uninterrupted service. These considerations are largely absent in Scandinavian countries and in countries like Japan and South Korea.

Of course, in recent years countries like the UK have witnessed civil unrest as well and hence, it is by no means conclusive that the Western countries and the countries mentioned above would be free from chaos and disorder that is manmade. Hence, the key take away is that companies have to be prepared for the worst wherever they are and whatever they are doing and disaster preparedness surely goes a long way in ensuring continuity of business in case of an emergency.

The point that needs to be noted is that companies might have different risk perceptions in different countries. However, this does not preclude them from adopting a global plan that is tailored according to local specifications.

Finally, companies around the world have their risk mitigation teams to take care of local as well as global emergencies. For instance, the 911 attacks and the 311 Japanese Tsunami disrupted the global markets as much as they did the local areas in which they struck. So it is important to note that both location and global thinking are important for companies when they prepare disaster management plans.

When organizations as a whole and individuals in particular develop the mindset for success, there is nothing stopping them from achieving their goals. Similarly, the ability of a company to respond quickly and swiftly to an emergency is largely a function of the disaster preparedness mindset among its employees.

We need not look farther than the response of companies in the wake of the 9-11 attacks. Companies like Goldman Sachs and Citibank were able to resume business in no time whereas other companies took their own time to resume operations. The difference in the response times of these companies is the prevailing mindset among its employees as to do the right thing in case of an emergency.

For instance, Citigroup lost many of its employees in the attacks but was in continuity of business mode within a couple of days. This was possible mainly due to the frame of mind of its employees who were trained and prepared to tackle emergencies as opposed to that of other companies that were caught like Deer blinded by a headlight.

To inculcate a mindset of disaster preparedness, companies ought to ensure that the employees do not panic in case of an emergency and have their wits around them when disaster strikes. This is possible only if the employees are trained to respond in an agile and adroit manner to emergencies. This is particularly important for those companies that operate mission critical systems like 24/7 banking operations and communications networks.

For these companies, disasters are opportunities to show their customers on how well they can respond to the emergency and ensure that the customers do not suffer. More often than not, the agility with which companies respond to emergencies is often the way in which top management maintains its calm and presence of mind during emergencies.

The reason for this is that it is human nature to flock around a leader in times of emergency and most of us would have known how we gravitate towards the head of the family or the one in charge during personal emergencies.

Similarly, companies ought to groom leaders who are capable of displaying extraordinary leadership during crisis situations and the way in which these leaders stand up and be counted during crises determines how well the company responds to the emergency.

Hence, the key takeaway here is that companies ought to nurture and groom leaders who display calm and not lose focus during an emergency and by doing so, the companies would have planned for emergencies when the workforce looks up to this leader and follows him or her like bees around the Queen Bee.

In conclusion, like in personal crises, it is the presence of mind and the well developed sense of fortitude that pulls people through emergencies. Likewise, companies ought to ensure that the mindset of disaster preparedness permeates to all levels of the organization and also to groom leaders who are capable of displaying extraordinary leadership during contingencies.

It is true that businesses face a lot of threats from several quarters including external threats from terrorists, natural calamities, unforeseen circumstances besides internal systems failures threatening shut down of operations etc.

In the highly competitive world today, every organization has realized the value and the need to have disaster recovery and business continuity plan in place to avoid disruption to the services and customers.

No business today can afford to have disruptions to its operations and deliveries. Realizing the uncertainties and the need to cover the risks, customers today have begun to demand that the Supplier Organizations and vendors demonstrate their capability to execute a viable Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity plans in place. On the whole we can say that every stake holder in the business has an interest to see that the business continuity is maintained at all times.

Business Continuity & Customers

Take the case of critical IT systems and network installations in Banks and Credit Card companies. Banking, hospitals, telecommunications and such critical operations cannot afford a failure on the part of their IT Systems both in terms of systems failure or hardware failure. They select vendors and partner with only those who are able to demonstrate the capability and provide workable solution for business continuity and disaster recovery.

Providing such plan has become a part of the total solution proposal and the cost of such plan may not come cheap. However both the supplier and the customer organizations cannot afford to go without a plan in place.

Brand & Market Share

Retaining brand leadership and market share is a huge challenge for companies. In the face of intense competition, the brands have got to keep up their performance on quality, delivery and all fronts to ensure they maintain their growth rates.

When faced with several options and choices, the Customer recall of a brand and loyalty to the brand may be very weak. In such cases, the companies cannot afford to have any disruption to supplies or absence from the market.

During the last year, floods in Thailand & Philippines caused immense damage to the plants especially the automotive and electronic industries. As a result the production and supplies to the markets were disrupted for quite a few months causing immense damage to the market share as well as to the financial health of the company.

Global companies usually have multiple locations in different regions of the world. Such multiple locations help them cover the risk of plant shut down to a large extent for they can easily set up alternative production lines and get started faster than the other companies who do not have alternatives on hand.

Stake Holder Expectations

Managements today are answerable to a host of stake holders in their business. They are answerable to the board and shareholders who expect the company to perform under all circumstances.

Besides, the regulatory authorities as well as the financial institutions who extend credit and fund the Company expect their returns and performance from the Company irrespective of any disruption. Security and Safety is a major concern that is required to be addressed by Companies from the point of view of human resource angle as well as from insurance perspective.

With all of the above requirements, it has become imperative for Companies in current times to adapt a disaster management and business continuity plan irrespective of the size of the Company. As business practices, products and technology are evolving, so are the risks and the need to cover the risks and ensure business continuity.

We live in a digital age and hence, no institution of the global economy can be immune from automation and the advent of digital means of operations. Banks and financial institutions were among the first adopters of automation considering the humungous benefits that they get from embracing IT (Information Technology).

The reason why banks and financial institutions rapidly embraced IT is that their operations when done manually take up a lot of time and effort from their staff as well making them do routine activities over and over again leading to loss of productivity and missing the chance to move up the value chain.

On the other hand, automation reduces the redundancies in their operations and frees up staff that can be deployed for activities that are more productive. This is the reason why banks and financial institutions are among the largest users of IT.

Further, many IT vendors have dedicated verticals to what are known as BFSI or Banking, Financial Services, and Insurance sectors for the large budgets that they have to implement IT solutions.

This is why many IT companies target the BFSI sector more than any other sector as they have the potential for high value deals running into the billions of dollars as compared to the other sectors that are less rich.

Some Consequences of Automation

Moreover, banks can reduce the incidence of customers visiting the branch for even mundane things like withdrawing money and updating their statements as automation means that ATMs (Automated Teller Machines) and online statements make physical visits to the branch unnecessary.

Indeed, many leading multinational banks actually charge for the physical visits as they encourage customers to bank online. of course, many of the old timers rue the loss of face-to-face contact and the doing away of personal relationships. However, such is the nature of the modern technology driven society that such considerations are usually secondary to the need to be efficient and efficacious.

Given the need for profits and any means of reducing costs that are necessary in this uber-competitive business landscape, banks and financial institutions have found that automation greatly improves their bottom line and leads to synergies between their processes.

Further, banks and financial institutions that have embraced automation have also found that they can concentrate of corporate banking and high Networth individuals for private banking by automating the routine processes in retail and commercial banking.

Synergies, Regulatory Requirements, and Lessening of Fraud

The third aspect why banks and financial institutions automate is that their core banking operations can be done in an improved manner when compared to the manual processing that takes up time, effort, and resources as well as leads to glitches and errors.

The last point is very crucial as manual processing is person driven and considering that, humans have a tendency to err. Automation removes the human element and makes the processes error free and less prone to glitches.

Moreover, the chances of fraud are minimized because of automation, which is a major benefit for banks and financial institutions that deal with large amounts of money and that too belonging to the customers whose hard earned assets they are managing.

In addition, banks and financial institutions have realized that they can report regulatory and legal requirements to the regulators in a better way through automation as well as the fact that storing historical data and storing customer details for extended periods is made easier because of automation.

Concluding Thoughts

Finally, banks and financial institutions have also automated their operations because of the convenience aspect to their customers who in this 24/7 breathless world might not have the time to physically visit the branch to transact.

After all, if you can remember the last time you visited a bank instead of online banking, chances are that it would have been in the past where you either needed to verify your documents or had to visit your personal banker.

With the advent of technology and the services sector, the rise of the professionally managed organizations was evident.

In this context, many family owned businesses seem to be failing before the second generation takes over.

The reasons for this are many and they include making the second and the subsequent generations obligated to take over the running of the company, making all family members part of the business, and operating in silos instead of being generalists who can have a broad perspective.

On the other hand, the lack of a clear succession plan once the family patriarch or matriarch dies or retires is also a reason for failure.

Finally, infighting among the family members over who would lead which segment once the founder or the head of the family dies or retires is another important reason for failure.

Family owned businesses could avoid these traps by ensuring that they do not pressurize the younger generation to enter the family business when they are not inclined to do so.

1. By forcing the next generation to enter the family business, the elders often make the younger lot commit to endeavors for which they are least equipped.

2. Next, the family can grow faster than the business and this makes the task of including everyone difficult. Often, the case becomes difficult, as the business might not have the bandwidth to support all the members.

   This can be resolved by ensuring that only those family members with the aptitude and the skills as well as the attitude and temperament are asked to join the business.

3. The third aspect is the fact that many family members remain stuck in narrow areas of specialization and fail to develop the general skills needed to run the family business.

   This can be resolved by ensuring that non-family members are promoted based on merit and not only on familial ties.

Apart from these factors, the lack of a clear succession plan and the disunity among family members is often a reason why many family businesses fail to survive into the subsequent generations. This can be seen in the way several corporate houses in recent years have either split or have been sold off because of these reasons.

Hence, these traps can be avoided and the family owned businesses could survive into the subsequent generations by following some of the practices that management experts have prescribed.

Finally, in these times when there is a rapid turnover of ideas and concepts, it becomes imperative for family businesses to retain their competitive edge in the face of the onslaught of competition.

Hence, they need all the energy and the foresight they can to avoid some of the reasons for failure.

Everywhere we look around us, we see the impacts of our unsustainable lifestyles. Whether it is the Australian Bushfires, the Amazon forest burning, or the unseasonal storms and hurricanes, the effects of climate change and eco unfriendly business and lifestyle practices are taking a toll on our planet.

Indeed, even the recent outbreak of the Coronavirus shows how fragile are our defences are against the effects of unsustainable business and consumerist models.

No wonder that in the West, there is a movement known as the Extinction Rebellion which calls for urgent action on climate change and ecological issues to ensure those future generations have a liveable world.

Of course, there are many who say that it is probably Too Late and hence, it is better to enjoy whatever we have and whatever we are doing.

This seems to be thinking of President Trump who has rolled back much of the environmental safeguards that his predecessor, Barack Obama, put in place to address sustainability issues.

Indeed, this is also the thinking that permeates most world leaders who scoff at the mention of sustainability and climate change.

Anti Science Mindsets, Denialism, and Bridging the Gap between the Two Camps

So, does this mean that we have to resign ourselves to our fates and let the Planet Burn? Moreover, are the average citizenry so helpless when the leaders are behaving irresponsibly that they cannot do much about anything?

And, what is the role of business in this whole debate wherein it continues on its ecologically damaging path with its Business as Usual strategies?

The answer to these questions lays more in terms of mindset and way of thinking, rather than anything.

For instance, climate change activists routinely run into fanatics who deny climate change and who insist that the climate always changes and there is nothing human made about it.

In addition, with the ascent of populists and nationalists worldwide, it has become the norm to attack scientists and science and the anti rationalists ensure that they drown out any voices of sanity with their High Decibel chants.

Therefore, what this shows is that there is a Wall of Denial between the two sides and hence, it is incumbent upon businesses and business leaders to take the lead and Bridge the Gap.

The need for businesses to take steps is high as they are the only ones who can spur some action by talking to both sides and bringing them together.

Business as Usual Would Not Do as We Have Reached the Point of No Return

Business has to also lobby the Powers That Be in all countries and urge them to take action on climate change and eco friendly practices. While this might seem idealistic at first glance, it is very much a practical and sane and rational approach.

This is because it is in the interest of business to act on climate change as its bottom lines can be impacted due to a warming planet and a burning Earth.

Indeed, the stakes could not have been higher as some experts predict that we have reached the Tipping Point and are now at the Point of No Return as far as climate change and ecological damage are concerned.

Therefore, it is either mass survival or mass extinction and hence, from a purely materialistic and profit oriented perspective, it is in the interest of business to take the lead on these issues.

As mentioned earlier, there needs to be a mindset change and the old paradigm of Milton Friedman, who proclaimed that The Responsibility of Business is Business, must be discarded in favour of new thinking. This is the only thing that can save from extinction.

Global Business Must Walk the Talk and Act Before it is too late

Having said that, it is also a fact that global businesses have been notoriously lethargic and tardy as far as their responsibility and commitment to fight climate change and ecological damage are concerned.

Indeed, if one were to go by the words and actions of many business leaders in the recent past, we find that more often than not, they are urging governments to rollback rule and regulations that are environmentally friendly.

In other words, they are the ones who are responsible for the damage and they are the ones who are blocking meaningful action on these issues.

At the same time, there is also an element of Hypocrisy here as they talk Big but Act in the Opposite Direction.

So, the need of the hour is for business to Walk the Talk and do something about climate change and ecological destruction. Green Washing or the Spin around Corporate Social Responsibility must be avoided and there must a genuine attempt to embrace sustainability before it is Too Late.

In addition, they must realise that responsibility is good for business as well as the recent research on this topic proves that sustainable business practices pay off over the longer term.

Conclusion

Last, the 21^st Century can be thought to be the Transition Century wherein we either move towards a sustainable future or are hurled back into the Dark Ages.

The Millennial generation are those who have the most at stake as it is their future that is up for grabs.

Therefore, it is the case that they take the lead and some action is visible in the form of the Green New Deal in the United States as well as by the Democrats running for election who have promised action on climate change and ecological issues. To conclude, it’s now or never.

Of late, many publicly listed companies have been living “quarter to quarter” or the practice of setting targets, tracking them for progress, and closing out sales and revenue generating items based on the next quarter which is a short term imperative rather than planning for the longer term.

This has led to both good and bad consequences as we would discuss subsequently and before that, it would be in the fitness of things to explain what is meant by living quarter to quarter. To start with, it has almost become the norm in the corporate world around the globe to release results for each quarter which is a standard practice except that the CEOs are also providing revenue and growth guidance for the next quarter rather than the full year.

Of course, in the annual results, they do so for the entire year that is coming up. However, the fact remains that investors, analysts, and even the hitherto serious private equity firms and assorted stakeholders have been focusing on quarterly performance rather than the full year performance.

This has led to a situation where stock prices swing wildly with each quarterly declaration of results which can go either way. While this is a good way to keep the “companies on their toes” as they would be nimble and agile enough to perform, it is also the case that “longer term value” considerations are being lost in the process.

Balancing Shorter Term Stock Prices with Longer Term Value Creation

Indeed, given the fact that equity prices make up just one component of value that corporates build over a longer term, it is our view that while it is good to be the “darlings of the stock markets” for a brief period, it is also the case that corporates must and should not lose sight of the “bigger picture” in the quest for “instant gratification”.

The reason for such quarterly focus has been due to the fact that worldwide the business landscape has become so “fast paced” that investors and analysts likewise are caught up in the “imperatives of the moment” and hence, reward or punish the corporates based on purely shorter term considerations.

The Role of Technological Acceleration

Moreover, with so many technology driven start-ups such as Uber and AirBnB upending traditional taxi and hotel companies mainly due to their agility and nimbleness using technology, it has become necessary for even traditional manufacturing and including service sector corporates to “jump on the shorter term bandwagon” where “survival or success” is purely determined on a quarterly basis.

Moreover, given the imperatives of the “24/7 Breaking News Cycle” media environment, it is often the case that corporates grab the headlines for their profits or losses measured in the shorter term rather than over a longer term.

This creates a “ripple effect” wherein the “electronic herd” takes over and influences investors and shareholders in a “frenzied” bout of selling and buying.

Creative Destruction

As mentioned earlier, this can be good from a “creative destruction” perspective since capitalism and the stock markets are always on the lookout for newer avenues of profits or the “next big thing”.

However, this can also lead to “myopic” outlook from the corporates and their CEOs who obsess over the quarterly results rather than focusing on creating longer term value.

Having said that, it is also not the case that all CEOs or corporates are “taken in” by this frenzy and there remain many “Blue Chip” stocks that perform consistently over the longer term.

For instance, corporates such as Unilever and Proctor and Gamble continue to be respected and much sought after mainly because they can balance the shorter term and the longer term imperatives and drivers of growth.

On the other hand, the worst affected are the technology companies because of the very nature of the industry they operate in. While Unilever and P&G can release new brands every now and then without affecting their revenue streams and profitability, companies such as Apple, Google, Facebook, and Microsoft have to be “hard at the game” to retain market share in much shorter timelines.

Corporate Longevity in an Impulsive Age

As technology accelerates the pace of change and the “Algorithmic” trading systems ensure that the equity markets are run on microsecond and millisecond basis, it is our view that this type of “quarterly impulses” would increase rather than decrease.

Therefore, any corporate that wishes to “stay in the hunt” for a longer term should wisely allocate resources such as capital and human resources in the pursuit of both shorter term targets as well as longer term value creation.

After all, “Rome was not built in a day” and hence, despite all the systems driven changes, old fashioned value creation would continue to be the bedrock by which corporates and their longevity are determined.

Conclusion

Having said that, it is also the case that the rapid turnover of hitherto winners that have now become losers such as Blackberry, Nokia, and Yahoo means that corporates and their CEOs are sometimes left with little choice but to obsess over the shorter term.

Given these imperatives, it is indeed the case that the more astute CEOs would ensure that they keep their jobs with impressive shorter term results and retain the respect of investors by handsomely rewarding them over the longer term.

Moreover, this can also ensure that employees are sufficiently motivated to work harder for the corporates with shorter term “carrots” in the form of stock options being balanced with the “longer term stability” of working for an organization that rewards them for their hard work.

MNC’s typically operate in several countries and hence the risks faced by their businesses depend on the location in which they are located and hence varies from place to place. So, there is a need for the MNC’s to mitigate all kinds of risks ranging from natural and terrorist attacks in developed countries like the US and in Europe to managing riots, floods and regional disturbances in countries like China and India.

For instance, it should not surprise many that Citibank and Fidelity have well developed business continuity programs that take into account disruptions to business in countries like India where their local operations can be disturbed due to political and social factors.

The key point to note for MNC’s is that when they operate in countries like India and China, they need to “Glocalize” their responses to risks. Glocalization is a term coined by the famous author, Thomas Friedman to denote the intersection of global and local in business.

Since we are living in a global economy and operate in local conditions, MNC’s need to plan for contingencies that are entirely local in nature but affect their global operations. For instance, the call centers operated by Infosys run on a 24/7 schedule but can be affected due to local disturbances. So, to mitigate the risks companies like Citibank, Fidelity and Infosys have devised a risk mitigation strategy that operates at several levels.

Each level of the risk mitigation strategy consists of managing the risks at that level giving precedence to the global first and the local next. So, disruptions to satellite links and global events are managed along with disruptions to the cab services and logistical services because of local conditions.

As mentioned earlier, the risk manager has to ensure that he or she can communicate effectively with the global audience and at the same time be sufficiently well versed in the local way of doing business to ensure that the business operations do not suffer because of disruptions.

Further, the risk mitigation strategy ought to take into account the fact that the ways of doing business differs from country to country. So an effective risk mitigation strategy for China might not work very well in India.

Hence, the emphases in this article on “Glocalization” or the need to plan for business continuity of global operations taking into account the local conditions. It is for this reason that many risk managers or the business continuity managers in these MNC’s are those who have travelled extensively but are also familiar with the local way of doing business.

Indeed, there is a great demand for risk managers for country operations of the MNC’s who are aware of the global business practices and at the same time are thoroughly conversant with the local business culture.

Finally, risk management in an emergency is all about how to respond to the situation at hand and hence, presence of mind is critical and crucial. One can prepare for many months or even years for contingencies but fail to act appropriately at the time the disaster strikes.

So, what is needed is a person or a team that knows how to respond in an agile and competent manner to the emergency. This is possible if the business continuity team is conversant with the global operations but have their feet firmly on the ground as far as local conditions are concerned.