LONE WORKER PROTECTION
FAIL TO PLAN, PLAN TO FAIL
Klaus Allion, managing director at ANT Telecom, explains how a proactive telecoms strategy can save money, improve productivity and protect lone workers. So why hasn’t every business got one?
Strategic planning is the stuff of a thousand soundbites – the most well- known being that to “fail to plan is to plan to fail”. Conversely, heavyweight champion Mike Tyson has a less erudite but characteristically brutal view of strategy. “Everyone has a plan,” he said, “until they get punched in the face.”
Only a fool would dare disagree with Iron Mike but, at first glance, his metaphor doesn’t seem to extend beyond the boxing ring. When it comes to the crucial arena of business telecommunications, unfortunately not everyone does have a plan. The implications of this, however, are similarly painful. The absence of a telecoms strategy means companies risk being left with a bloodied nose – whether that’s an
avoidable catastrophe with a lone worker, unproductive operations or the expensive waste of valuable company resources.
LONELY? PLAN IT One of the most common flaws in companies’ telecoms approach is the failure to provide optimal, cost- effective protection for lone workers. With more than six million UK employees now working in isolation without direct supervision, lone working is a clear direction of travel for British businesses.
In many cases workers are equipped with lone worker solutions to mitigate risk and provide a mechanism to mobilise help in the event of an emergency. But the selection, procurement and deployment of these solutions can often be narrow, piecemeal and misaligned with business needs. The hidden impact on productivity, service delivery and, ultimately, profit can be severe.
The challenge is particularly prominent in larger, multi-site companies or complex businesses where operations are spread across disparate departments or pocketed in organisational silos. The perils of maintaining a silo mentality are well-documented – but the problems are often exacerbated in businesses where departmental silos are given full budgetary autonomy.
This can lead to inefficient, reactive and isolated purchasing decisions that fail to connect with wider business objectives. By taking a more holistic approach and considering broader organisational needs, budgets can be maximised, leading to a greater ability to make value-based, joined-up buying decisions.
30
LONE DEALS The implications of the silo-led purchasing of lone worker solutions are perhaps best highlighted by common behaviours in organisations that offer a diverse range of services. For example, councils and local authorities naturally have a broad composition of unrelated departments such as social work, housing, maintenance, recreational and environmental. Many of these areas have a major requirement for lone workers – all of whom are exposed to risk. Line managers understand these risks and their duty of care to team members, but the well-established structures and procedures within their businesses often force them to make purchasing decisions in isolation from the rest of the organisation.
www.tomorrowshs.com
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 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64