Low-level sponsor

If the plan's sponsor is less than C*O-level player, an 800-pound gorilla on the organizational chart, pass on the project.

Business Continuity requires substantial input from an organization's Subject Matter Experts (SMEs). These people already have their "regular" jobs and usually a little extra; their days are pretty full already. While individuals may be willing, even enthusiastic, to participate, unless their managers are sympathetic they won't be able to provide the planner the time needed to develop a plan.
While Business Continuity planning is a bottom up process, it must have top down support. Support must be highly visible and the flag-waving must be ongoing.
The ideal sponsor candidates are CEOs, CFOs, COOs, and Presidents.
CEOs, CFOs, COOs, and Presidents all are concerned with The Bottom Line, especially if their compensation is linked to that Bottom Line. Other "C"s head up functional units - production, InfoTech, facilities, etc.
The problem with having the CIO/VP-InfoTech as the sponsor is that in most businesses, InfoTech is often viewed as Big Brother telling profit centers what InfoTech services the profit center needs to do its work. There is a lack of trust; the suspicion is that InfoTech is looking out only for its own interests.
On the other hand, InfoTech has been in the InfoTech Disaster Recovery - which is a Business Continuity component - for years.
That's not to write that ALL InfoTech executives are locked into an "InfoTech first, last, always" mentality. I actually know two who understand enterprise Business Continuity. Trouble is, I know many more who don't understand Business Continuity.

 

Instant plan

While your mileage may vary, a "typical" Business Continuity project for a medium size organization with one location takes about 6 months from crafting the Statement of Work (SOW) and Project Plan to presentation of the Final Deliverable. Sometimes less, sometimes more.

Training is extra and never-ending.
If the prospective client wants project completion within 90 days or less, run.
While a plan might be cobbled together in 90 days, there is no breathing room; no time to go back to the Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) who provide the information for the plan. No time for SMEs to go on vacation, get sick, or take a mandated holiday (e.g. in the US, July 4). There is little time to discover and evaluate all the realistic avoidance and mitigation options.
Often what happens with instant plans is that once the planner's recommendations are presented (First Deliverable) and the ball is tossed into management's court, enthusiasm for the project, like a yard without sufficient water, withers and dies. Management never finds the time to review the recommendations, to determine what to implement and when.
Just guessing, I suspect between 25% and 50% of all Business Continuity projects never get past the First Deliverable.

 

Extended plans

I recently proposed a project plan which had two 90-working-day phases.

Knowing that the prospective client was concerned about time, I added one word - "working" - to the duration, and I eliminated my standard requirement for management to respond to the First Deliverable within two weeks.
(Allowing a longer turn around time almost guarantees the project chokes on dust as it lies on someone's desk or out-of-sight on a high shelf.)
I told the person with whom I was working that the 90 working day phase had some padding - in bowling terms, there was a little sand bagging - to accommodate even personnel who were "too busy" to meet with me as first agreed. (Planners sometimes need to be part blood hound to track down reluctant SMEs.)
Because I am a consultant who needs to schedule my next job, my proposal included a penalty if the project phases dragged on. Actually, had the prospective client looked closely at the penalty they would have been seen an advantage to stretch out the project - an extra month not at 1/3 of the phase price but at 1/10th of the phase price. (I won't do that again!)
According to my contact with the organization, the CFO "probably" would be the sponsor. Translation: I'm "probably" better off not signing a contract with this prospective client.

 

Never ending plans and missing managers

As I was negotiating with the client with the time phobia, I took on a local "quickie" 5 week project, mostly in a documentation role.

The project was to document what needed to be done to get InfoTech up and running at a remote site. It could have been done, except . . .
I interviewed with the project manager and several InfoTech hardware folks and said that my part of the project could be completed before I was off to Grandma's house for a long visit.
At that point I was told I would meet the rest of the team at the regular alternate-Wednesday project status meetings.
The Wednesday meeting was held on Thursday. (Clue 1)
The meeting started off noting that the project management had been passed from an experienced manager to a tyro. (Clue 2)
Two critical personalities - the hardware and software managers - were absent - AWOL. (Clue 3)
When the outgoing project manager suggested that the proposed (Clue 4) project plan was aggressive, everyone agreed (Clue 5) and began providing a litany of risks to the plan's completion date.
Even with all the clues before me, I remained confident that, if the Client followed my very simple plan, the documentation effort could be completed by my exit date.
As the meeting fragmented into concluding mini-sessions, I was told that I would get the laptop, promised for the previous day (Clue 6) and that I would receive an emailed contact list that afternoon (never showed - Clue 7).
The following Wednesday I was told the project was cancelled.

---

The gentleman in the furry suit, above, is a resident of the National Zoo. (The one below shares my office space.)

 

 

---

John Glenn, MBCI, has been helping organizations of all types avoid or mitigate risks to their operations since 1994. Comments about this article, or others at http://JohnGlennMBCI.com/ may be sent to JohnGlennCRP @ yahoo.com.