t i g h t r o p e
• Sufficient human, financial, and material resources are in place to accomplish all planned outcomes.
• Supply and distribution chains have inbuilt resilience to compensate for any disruption.
• External support is in place before the crisis point, and has been continually tested and updated.
Once again, as with intelligence and planning, delivery of effective solutions for operational readiness is often best addressed through external support. Just as it is often more cost- effective and practical to outsource facilities management responsibilities, in a very similar sense the deployment of resources to support security management, journey management, guarding, or other services is likely to be most achievable by leveraging the resources of an organisation that specialises in that field.
Whilst these principles will be recognisable to most organisations, and in many cases will be in place to a greater or lesser extent across most of those organisations’ business units or operating countries, it is nonetheless important that the challenges of operations in an unstable environment should not be underestimated. Whether it be the threat of sandstorms closing an airport and disrupting travel for key personnel; a bank’s liquidity crisis causing payroll and other financial failures; or the development of popular hostility due to perceptions of discriminatory or exploitative business practices – under the conditions for instability identified above, the risk posed to an organisation from any one of these threats is exponentially greater than it might be in a ‘stable environment’.
So how can an organisation benefit from acting to reduce its risk in an unstable environment?
Aside from the obvious benefits of improving the safety and security of the organisation’s staff, finances, operations, and reputation, a real competitive advantage can be obtained if mitigation measures are implemented correctly and in a timely manner. Not only can direct costs be reduced (for example by winning reductions in insurance premiums, or identifying more effective guarding or security management strategies) – but in the dog-eat- dog world of 24/7 global business operations the ability to remain safely in a country for a few days longer than the competition, to get back in a few days sooner, or to recover from a crisis faster, may make the difference between being a market leader or a straggler behind the pack.
Whether this competitive edge is achieved using internal or external resources, it still hinges on “the five P’s”: Prior Preparation Prevents Poor Performance. Or another maxim: “failing to prepare is a preparation for failure”.
To conclude, a short case history:
A major international organisation with offices across the MENA region had undertaken only limited preparations in Libya, despite the increasing tensions in 2010/11. Basic subscription intelligence services were in place, but not actively monitored and assessed; contingency plans were in place, but limited in nature and scope; and no active steps had been taken to prepare for an emergency by engaging external security or logistical support. When the tensions spilled over into
open civil war, this organisation found its people trapped in Libya and at great personal risk. Heavy costs were incurred as the organisation scrambled to respond, calling on Pilgrims Group to evacuate its personnel from Libya; and operations in country ceased completely and indefinitely. The negative effects of these consequences for the organisation’s reputation (both internally and externally) were significant.
Contrast this with the same organisation’s response to unfolding events through later stages of 2011, as the Arab Spring progressed. The organisation approached Pilgrims Group, in the aftermath of events in Libya, with a view to developing a broad and robust range of preparedness measures. Led by a proactive intelligence-based approach, Pilgrims prioritised the business-critical country operations at highest risk from deteriorating stability, and deployed consultants to develop comprehensive emergency relocation / evacuation plans. All the highest risk countries across the MENA region were covered, starting with Bahrain. And when in March 2011 the Saudi Armed Forces rolled across King Fahd Causeway, to suppress the ongoing protests, Pilgrims deployed a team of consultants into country to support the organisation in implementing the plans that had been put in place. Safety of all personnel was ensured; costs were kept down through the use of previously identified subcontractor support functions; business interruption was minimised; and after no more than a week of operational disruption the organisation was able to return to ‘business as normal’ well ahead of the competition.
More than any dry itemisation of pros and cons, the difference in outcomes for this same organisation in Libya and in Bahrain demonstrates unambiguously the risks associated with failure to prepare, and the benefits to be gained from prior preparation.
Gabriel Carter Pilgrims Group Ltd
www.pilgrimsgroup.com
> 3
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36