I am a Business Continuity Manager ... and I want to create BCM indicators!

As a Business Continuity Manager (BCMer), I recognize that the effectiveness of our continuity strategies is based not only on their design but also on how well we can measure their effect. In our first article regarding measuring our BC efforts, we reminded that the adage, “if you cannot measure it, you can’t manage it,” resonates deeply in many professions, serving as a call to action for us to establish clear, actionable metrics.

In this article, I will explore other ideas how we can construct a robust framework for measuring business continuity efforts, utilizing S.M.A.R.T. indicators, interesting metrics, appropriate tools, practical calculations, and efficient management strategies.

To create meaningful metrics, we should employ the S.M.A.R.T. framework—Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. This structured approach ensures that each indicator we develop truly reflects our organizational goals and enhances our ability to measure our BCM efforts.

Clarity is crucial. Instead of a vague goal like "improve recovery plans," we can specify, "conduct quarterly reviews of all recovery plans for critical assets." This specificity allows us to focus our efforts and resources effectively. Metrics must be quantifiable to track progress accurately. For example, we can set a goal to “reduce recovery time objectives (RTO) for all critical systems by 20% within the next fiscal year.” This allows us to measure success in concrete terms. It’s important to ensure that targets are realistic, considering our organization's capabilities and resources.

Setting overly ambitious goals can lead to frustration and disillusionment among team members. Each indicator should align with broader organizational objectives. For instance, if the company aims to enhance customer satisfaction, a relevant BC indicator might be “percentage of critical services restored within the customer-defined RTO.” Establishing deadlines keeps the focus on achieving goals. For example, “complete all plan reviews by the end of Q2” provides a clear timeframe for accountability.

To go beyond traditional metrics that might not provide real insight, I advocate for more engaging and meaningful indicators that can reveal the true effectiveness of our business continuity efforts. Plan Activation Rate tracks the percentage of plans activated during actual incidents compared to those that were tested. A high activation rate indicates that our planning efforts are practical and actionable. Training Participation Rate measures the percentage of staff who have completed business continuity training, helping gauge organizational preparedness. For instance, if only 30% of employees are trained, it signals a need for improved training outreach.

Post-Incident Review Completion Rate tracks the percentage of incidents that undergo a formal review process within a specified timeframe. High completion rates suggest that the organization values learning from past experiences and is committed to continuous improvement. Employee Awareness Score can be assessed through periodic surveys to determine staff awareness of business continuity protocols. This can be quantified as a percentage of employees who can accurately describe their roles in a continuity scenario.

Choosing the right tools is crucial for streamlining the measurement process and ensuring efficient data collection and analysis. Business Continuity Management Software, such as Archer, Fusion Risk Management, Preparis, or EverBridge, provides centralized dashboards that allow real-time monitoring of indicators and automated reporting capabilities. These tools facilitate a comprehensive overview of our continuity efforts.

Surveys and Feedback Forms, utilizing tools like SurveyMonkey or Google Forms, enable us to collect qualitative data from staff after training sessions or incident responses. This feedback is invaluable for identifying gaps and opportunities for improvement.

For smaller organizations or specific projects, a well-structured spreadsheet can suffice for tracking and analyzing indicators. Utilizing functions and formulas can help automate calculations, reducing manual effort. Incident Management Systems, such as ServiceNow or Jira, can help us track metrics related to incident recovery, response times, and post-incident analyses.

Calculating indicators is essential for understanding our performance and making informed decisions. Some examples here:

• Recovery Time Objective (RTO) Improvement can be quantified using the formula: RTO Improvement (%) = [(Old RTO - New RTO) / Old RTO] x 100. This formula helps us quantify the effectiveness of our recovery strategies over time.
• Training Participation Rate (%) = (Number of Trained Employees / Total Employees) x 100 provides insight into the level of preparedness across the organization and highlights areas for improvement in training outreach.
• Plan Activation Rate (%) = (Number of Plans Activated / Total Plans) x 100 assesses the practicality of our continuity plans during real incidents and tests.
• Post-Incident Review Completion Rate (%) = (Number of Reviews Completed / Total Incidents) x 100 helps ensure that we are learning from each incident and continuously improving our processes.
• Employee Awareness Score (%) = (Number of Employees Who Can Describe Their Roles / Total Employees Surveyed) x 100 indicates how well employees understand their responsibilities in a continuity scenario, which is vital for effective response.

One of the significant challenges in measuring and managing business continuity is the potential for excessive administrative work. To keep our efforts efficient and focused, we could employ several strategies such as automated reporting by using software that automates data collection and reporting can significantly reduce manual entry tasks. Many BCM tools come equipped with reporting features that generate insights based on real-time data, allowing us to focus on analysis rather than data gathering.

Set Clear Responsibilities by delegating specific tasks to team members ensures that everyone has a defined role in the measurement process. By distributing responsibilities, we prevent any single person from becoming overwhelmed and promote a collaborative environment.

Regular Reviews establish a routine for reviewing indicators—perhaps quarterly—can help us identify trends and issues without the need for constant monitoring. This cadence allows us to focus our efforts on areas requiring attention while maintaining a broader perspective on our overall continuity capabilities:

• Prioritize Metrics by focusing on a few key metrics that align closely with organizational goals, we can minimize complexity and streamline our reporting processes. This focus ensures we concentrate on what truly matters.
• Engage stakeholders by keeping communication open with them can help us ensure that the metrics we focus on are relevant and valuable.
• Regular updates and discussions about our measurement approach can lead to better alignment and support.

In conclusion, measuring business continuity is not merely about collecting data; it’s about collecting the right data that drives improvement and showcases our contributions to organizational resilience. By utilizing S.M.A.R.T. indicators, interesting metrics, appropriate tools, and practical calculations, we can effectively measure and enhance our BC capabilities without falling into the trap of excessive administration. This structured approach ensures that our work as BCMers is transparent, valued, and continuously evolving. By implementing these practices, I believe we can foster a culture of preparedness within our organizations. Ultimately, our goal is to ensure that when the unexpected occurs, we are not just ready to respond but are also positioned to thrive in the face of adversity.