Author: Owen Miles, VP Solutions Engineering EMEA at Restrata
Author Bio: Owen Miles brings 20+ years of experience in operational resilience and has been instrumental in helping 800+ companies implement and realise the value of resilience solutions.
Blog Series: ‘Miles to Go’ – Exploring the foundations of resilience & continuity
(Part Two: Lessons from the Road)
#18 – Speed Bumps and Blind Spots: Common Pitfalls in Crisis Planning
Date: 8 Jan 2025
Speed Bumps and Blind Spots: Common Pitfalls in Crisis Planning
Crisis plans often look solid – until they’re tested. That’s when the speed bumps and blind spots appear. And unfortunately, they tend to show up at the worst possible time.
I’ve seen organizations with beautifully formatted documents that fail to address the most basic questions: Who makes the first call? What happens if the crisis occurs outside working hours? Who has the authority to escalate? These gaps aren’t always obvious during planning sessions – but they become painfully clear when the pressure is on.
One of the most common speed bumps is over-reliance on assumptions. Plans often assume that key personnel will be available, that systems will function as expected, and that communication channels will be clear. But in a real crisis, those assumptions can unravel quickly. People may be unreachable. Systems may be down. Information may be incomplete or conflicting.
Another frequent blind spot is lack of integration. Crisis plans are often developed in silos – security has one plan, IT another, HR a third. Each may be well thought out, but when a crisis spans multiple domains (as most do), coordination breaks down. Teams operate in isolation, decisions are delayed, and the response becomes fragmented.
There’s also the issue of static planning. Many organizations build a plan once and leave it untouched for years. But threats evolve. Teams change. Technology advances. A plan that hasn’t been revisited or tested recently is likely outdated – and potentially dangerous.
And then there’s the human factor. Plans often fail to account for how people behave under stress. Instructions that seem clear in a meeting room may be confusing in the heat of a crisis. Roles that look logical on paper may be misinterpreted in practice. Without rehearsal and real-world testing, even the best plans can fall short.
I once observed a crisis simulation that revealed this issue with striking clarity. As part of the exercise, staff were evacuated from the building and handed either a red or green card. A green card meant they were available to support the recovery effort; a red card meant they were not – regardless of role, seniority, or department. When the recovery plan was activated, only those with green cards could be called upon. The result? Immediate gaps. Key roles were unmanned. Critical decisions stalled. Dependencies that had never been questioned were suddenly exposed. There were no deputies, no backups, and no contingencies. The plan had assumed availability – and that assumption collapsed under pressure.
The most resilient organizations I’ve worked with treat crisis planning as a living process. They identify speed bumps early – through simulations, drills, and honest reviews. They challenge assumptions, integrate across departments, and adapt their plans as their environment changes.
Because in a crisis, you don’t rise to the occasion – you fall back on your preparation. And if that preparation is shallow, fragmented, or outdated, the consequences can be severe.
Call to Action: Run a quick audit of your crisis plan. Where are the assumptions? Where are the gaps? Identify one blind spot – and fix it.
Next Week: We’ll explore how remote and hybrid workforces are reshaping resilience – and why visibility, communication, and culture matter more than ever when teams are distributed.