Emergency Planning and Disaster Recovery for Knowledge Management
This paper examines how organizations can safeguard critical knowledge assets during disasters such as floods, fires, earthquakes, and cyberattacks. Drawing on the DIKW (Data, Information, Knowledge, Wisdom) model, it argues that standard data recovery plans are often insufficient for full knowledge recovery. The paper outlines key strategies including incident response planning, virtualization, continuous data protection, cloud-based services, and Knowledge Continuity Programs. It also identifies three essential improvements for effective Disaster Recovery Plans: upper management support, identification of mission-critical components, and systems capable of facilitating rapid interdepartmental communication.
- Introduction: The Impact of Disasters on Business Knowledge: Disasters threaten business continuity and recovery timelines
- Disaster Recovery in the IT Industry: IT disaster recovery must address data security gaps
- Knowledge Recovery and the DIKW Model: DIKW model frames knowledge recovery above data recovery
- Protecting Knowledge During Disastrous Events: Incident response, technology, and continuity programs protect knowledge
- Conclusion: Strengthening Disaster Recovery Plans: Three key improvements needed for effective DRP implementation
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Frames disaster recovery within the DIKW hierarchy, elevating the discussion beyond simple data backup to full knowledge preservation.
- Integrates practical technology solutions (virtualization, CDP, cloud services) alongside organizational strategies such as Knowledge Continuity Programs.
- Concludes with three concrete, actionable recommendations for improving any Disaster Recovery Plan, giving the argument a clear prescriptive payoff.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates synthesis across multiple sources to build a layered argument. Rather than summarizing each source independently, the author weaves together Carlson & Parker's operational guidance, the IT security literature, and O'Sullivan's knowledge continuity framework to show that effective disaster planning must address data, information, and knowledge as distinct but interdependent assets.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens by establishing the business stakes of disaster events, then narrows to the IT security context before situating the problem within the DIKW model. The central section surveys protective technologies and organizational strategies. A focused conclusion translates the discussion into three targeted recommendations for improving Disaster Recovery Plans. The structure moves logically from problem definition through solution exploration to prescription.
Introduction: The Impact of Disasters on Business Knowledge
Disasters that can critically compromise the accessibility of knowledge include floods, fires, earthquakes, hurricanes, employee sabotage, computer viruses, and theft. The effects of disasters can persist even after physical damage has been repaired. Simply put, the earlier a business recovers from a disaster, the fewer wide-ranging, long-term effects it will experience. Not only is the loss of sales during a disaster destructive for a company, but "the loss of customers, vendors, inventory and employee records extend recovery times from weeks and months to years" (Carlson & Parker, 1998). However, if a company has a premeditated disaster recovery plan (DRP), it can reduce the impact of a disaster, whereas inadequate preparations can result in a business experiencing the liquidation of its bank accounts (Carlson & Parker, 1998).
Disaster Recovery in the IT Industry
In the Information Technology industry, disaster recovery (DR) security issues occur repeatedly. The critical security measures in an organization's environment are frequently addressed through storage solutions; however, these measures mostly do not prove sufficient on their own. The need of the time is that IT disaster recovery plans must also address data security issues. It is likewise necessary that storage managers consider data security from the perspective of a malicious actor. If these two strategies are applied together, companies have a greater chance of recovering and improving their security systems in the event of an attack, failure, or disaster ("Disaster Recovery Security," 2011).
Knowledge Recovery and the DIKW Model
In the DIKW model (Data, Information, Knowledge, and Wisdom), knowledge is ranked above information. Most of the strategies and procedures for disaster recovery of data and information that companies adopt may not be adequate for the disaster recovery of knowledge. However, in the case of emergencies, if a company has already planned for knowledge recovery, that plan may incorporate a strong data and information recovery plan as well. It is therefore critically important that companies take a diversity of approaches to emergency recovery in terms of knowledge management.
Conclusion: Strengthening Disaster Recovery Plans
Research suggests that three areas relating to a Disaster Recovery Plan need improvement. First, a DRP requires the support of upper management in order to be successfully implemented. Second, companies must identify the components that are most important to their continued success. The effectiveness of a DRP is entirely dependent on the proper documentation of these identified components, together with a changeover plan for each of them. Third, DRPs must be designed as recovery systems with the capability to incorporate retrieved information so that quick communication between departments can be facilitated.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.