One of the mistakes most commonly made is to assume that all crisis plans are the same. Having worked with a wide variety of Crisis Management Teams from many different industries and sectors, they can differ significantly according to the structure and function of the Crisis Management Team. This article is intended to help you to ensure that the plan you produce is appropriate to the team and purpose for which it is designed.
There are five principal steps which should be undertaken as part of the process of producing the plan, as discussed below.
The first step should always be to determine what type of team you are writing the plan for. Is it a strategic team or tactical? It may even be a mix of the two and the plan needs to reflect this. A plan may require a completely different format and content depending on the function of the team for which it is designed. Is the team responsible for Crisis Communications? Is it offering strategic direction or practical instructions? The team’s role is the principal determining factor in the content of the plan.
Secondly, it is essential to understand how the team operates. What is the structure? What are the team dynamics? Is it a virtual team? A good plan will reflect reality – writing a plan which tries to force a team to work in a way with which they are uncomfortable is inevitably counterproductive – the plan will be ignored and therefore will become irrelevant. Should the plan assume that all issues are addressed collectively? Does the team structure mandate structured review points? Find out how they work and construct the plan around it.
Thirdly, what does the team want from the plan? Some plans offer lots of detailed information, others high-level checklists and flow charts. There is no “right” answer, except that the plan must give team members the level of direction and information that they feel is useful and appropriate. Typically, for example, presenting Senior Management with a plan full of pages of close-typed text is pointless. Equally, at a tactical level more information may be required. This can only be determined by working with the team.
The fourth step is to make sure that the layout of the plan is logical. The best plans map to the response process. Content should be ordered in a logical progression which guides the team through the steps of the Crisis Management process in the order in which they are likely to arise. There is nothing more frustrating than leafing through a plan to try to find what you need in Appendix C when you are operating under pressure. If my next step is to conduct an impact assessment, I would expect to see the impact assessment form on the next page, not buried in an Appendix. Remember – above all else, the Plan is a working tool.
Fifth and potentially most important is to get the team to rehearse using the plan before you finalize it. Remember, these are the people who have to use it in anger. Regardless of how good you think it is or how much input you have had from the team in developing it, there will be bits that just don’t work in practice or which can be improved. Also, people are much more likely to use the plan and follow the process if they feel that they have had a hand in developing it.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/6380123