single-dr.php

JDR Vol.17 No.6 pp. 861-863
(2022)
doi: 10.20965/jdr.2022.p0861

Note:

How BCPs Have Changed – Case Study from COVID-19

Takahiro Ono*,**,†

*Mitsubishi Corporation Insurance Co., Ltd.
31F, 2-6-1 Marunouchi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-0005, Japan

Corresponding author

**Asian Disaster Reduction Paper, Kobe, Japan

Received:
December 31, 2021
Accepted:
September 7, 2022
Published:
October 1, 2022
Keywords:
business continuity planning (BCP), business continuity management (BCM), COVID-19, Area BCM
Abstract

The explosion of COVID-19 infection hit the world in 2020, which prompted the Japanese government to declare a state of emergency and require society to refrain from going outdoors and promote working from home. Although there was a lot of confusion on the side of employees and businesses at the beginning of the introduction of remote work, it gradually took root, there were differences depending on the industry. The introduction of remote work has overturned the common sense of Japanese companies that used to require employees to come to the office to work, and has improved the level of business continuity planning (BCP) measures. This can be said to be the result of changing the BCP measures and strategies, which immediately eliminated the bottlenecks in the priority operations group. It is interesting to note that the external pressure has led to a reconsideration of measures and strategies that had been assumed to be sufficient. This note focuses on cases where measures and strategies that were not selected as earthquake countermeasures were selected as countermeasures to COVID-19 and consequently led to the strengthening of earthquake countermeasures. This fact could be applied to further discuss the relationship between countermeasures and unavailable resources and discuss the need for a shared risk assessment model for multi-stakeholder BCP development such as Area Business Continuity Management (BCM) [1].

Cite this article as:
T. Ono, “How BCPs Have Changed – Case Study from COVID-19,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.17, No.6, pp. 861-863, 2022.
Data files:
References
  1. [1] H. Baba et al., “Area Business Continuity Management, A New Approach to Sustainable Local Economy,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.10, No.2, pp. 204-209, 2015.
  2. [2] T. Ono and V. Anbumozhi, “Effects of Business Continuity Planning on Reducing Economic Loss Due to Natural Disasters,” Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA) Discussion Paper Series No.350, 2020.
  3. [3] International Organization for Standardization (ISO), “Security and Resilience – Business Continuity Management Systems – Guidance on the Use of ISO 22301,” ISO 22313:2020, 2020.
  4. [4] The Tokyo Chamber of Commerce and Industry Report, 2020, https://www.tokyo-cci.or.jp/page.jsp?id=1022366 (in Japanese) [accessed December 1, 2021]
  5. [5] N. Walia, “Zoom’s Year in Review: Advancing Business Communications in 2019 and Beyond,” Zoom Blog, 2019, https://blog.zoom.us/zoom-year-in-review-2019/ [accessed December 1, 2021]
  6. [6] Zoom Blog, 2020, https://blog.zoom.us/ja/2020%E5%B9%B4%E3%82%92%E6%8C%AF%E3%82%8A%E8%BF%94%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6/ (in Japanese) [accessed December 1, 2021]
  7. [7] J. Spataro, “Microsoft Teams Reaches 13 Million Daily Active Users, Introduces 4 New Ways for Teams to Work Better Together,” Microsoft, 2019, https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/blog/2019/07/11/microsoft-teams-reaches-13-million-daily-active-users-introduces-4-new-ways-for-teams-to-work-better-together/ [accessed December 1, 2021]

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera.

Last updated on Dec. 01, 2022