By using this type of planning, any company can simulate what would take place in a crisis, and can determine what would be done if it were to actually occur. The old adage of "practice makes perfect" may seem very cliche, but there is some truth to the statement. Even though no company wants or expects to have a crisis in it or technology, the companies that are truly prepared for just about every eventuality will be the companies that have the smallest amount of damage based on the significance of the crisis that takes place (Dezenhall & Weber, 2007). A contingency plan has to stipulate who will perform what activities, so that there is no confusion about that issue during a crisis. This is especially true with a spokesperson, because there should only be one person who is designated to speak for the company and who will provide information to the public.
Continuity planning is also very important for any business that uses technology to a significant degree. If there is a crisis, how will that business access important information? That is a question that must be answered individually by each business, and businesses that cannot answer that question can experience serious repercussions when something goes wrong and the business is no longer sure how to access information in order to keep moving forward. If all of that information is actually lost or destroyed, much of the ability of the business to survive will also be lost (Barton, 2007). That is something that should certainly be avoided, but that a company should not ignore. Assumption is a very dangerous thing when it comes to the idea that nothing will go wrong...
When people assume that everything will be fine, they often find out the hard way that is not the case. For a business, that can be highly devastating.
Handling a crisis correctly is part of what a good leader must do, but it should not be the sole responsibility of leadership (Barton, 2007). It should also be the responsibility of the entire company, working together as a whole. When a company understands the value of crisis management from all angles, that company will be better prepared to deal with any eventuality with which it must contend. Because that is the case, the company will move forward more easily and will not have to be as concerned about future success. The idea of a crisis is significant, but the idea of how that crisis is handled is often more important. Companies that handle crises well generally fare better overall than companies that do not handle these issues appropriately. That is true from the standpoint of the continuity of the business, and also true from the standpoint of public relations and how the public feels about the business.
References
Barton, L. (2007). Crisis leadership now: A real-world guide to preparing for threats, disaster, sabotage, and scandal. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Dezenhall, E. & Weber, J. (2007). Damage control: Why everything you know about crisis management is wrong. New York, NY: Portfolio Hardcover.
Ulmer, R.R., Sellnow, T.L., & Seeger, M.W. (2006). Effective crisis communication: Moving from crisis to opportunity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
