"Crisis management" or "incident management"?
A veteran of the British Standard for Business Continuity Management process explains why companies should prefer the former
Will the amateur lexicographers please stand up? In a decision worthy of a Dr. Johnson or Noah Webster, the newly-released British Standard for Business Continuity Management (known as BS 25999) has replaced the term ‘crisis management’ with ‘incident management’. According to Peter Power of London-based Visor Consultants, who also served on the small team that developed the standard, the decision was based on the observation that “the noun ‘incident’ might be less troublesome to digest for the stakeholders of an organisation affected by a disaster or other risk event.” Nevertheless, Power argues, much is lost in the difference in meaning between the two terms.
“Crisis (management) is a precise, honest and eponymous noun,” he explains. “It’s short lived and requires special skills to respond. On the other hand, incident is defined as ‘an event or occurrence’ and therefore can mean just about anything over an infinite period of time.” How can this semantic difference have a real-world effect? According to Power, it is a matter of public relations. Should a company be responsible for a major catastrophe, or should it attract the media’s focus during a local emergency, calling the event an ‘incident’ will make the company “appear out of touch, uncaring and aloof from reality. It seems you are more concerned about spin than honesty.” On the other hand, while he advises clients to use the word ‘crisis’, he also says that calling the response team a ‘crisis team’ may overstate the case, especially if recovery is well under way.
Power offers a set of guidelines for proper ‘crisis’ management:
* Do not waste time on getting 100 percent accuracy as to the cause of the crisis. This may prove impossible.
* Assess the situation from inside and outside the organisation as all stakeholders might perceive it. Perception equals reality.
* Anticipate the immediate and probable impacts and subsequent consequences and get ahead of them.
* Take direct actions to contain the likely or perceived damage to the company’s brand and reputation
